Billy Gilmour

[KingRocketman II]

2 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

I'm just advancing the argument that he is overrated. This argument is unrelated to my view on him in relation to the Scotland National Team. Hope that clears it up for you.  

of course you are. yawn. 

 

[2426255]

1 minute ago, KingRocketman II said:

of course you are. yawn. 

 

Why do you engage if you think I'm trolling? Just put me on ignore. 

[Caledonian1]

Just now, 2426255 said:

Why do you engage if you think I'm trolling? Just put me on ignore. 

Often you post some decent stuff on the national team. However, when it comes to Billy Gilmour you come across as an attention seeking bore.

[2426255]

37 minutes ago, Caledonian1 said:

Often you post some decent stuff on the national team. 

Thank you for those kind words. They won't be forgotten and you will be handsomely rewarded. 

[2426255]

A comparison to Norwich's alternative midfielders

On average, Norwich City lose a goal in each half when Billy Gilmour is in the team. I adjusted for minutes played as it's more accurate than a per 90 statistic, but reveals the same story in terms of points gained and goal difference.

[RandomGuy.]

4 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

A comparison to Norwich's alternative midfielders

On average, Norwich City lose a goal in each half when Billy Gilmour is in the team. I adjusted for minutes played as it's more accurate than a per 90 statistic, but reveals the same story in terms of points gained and goal difference.

What a waste of time that is, you can't claim Gilmour alone is the reason Norwich concede/don't win points.

Norwich have lost more on Saturdays than Sundays this season, maybe thats the issue. 

[2426255]

4 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Norwich have lost more on Saturdays than Sundays this season, maybe thats the issue. 

That's possible, I'll have to look into it. thanks. 

[19QOS19]

Why do you engage if you think I'm trolling? Just put me on ignore. [emoji2369]

This is the only sensible thing this muppet has ever posted. For the love of god can people take this suggestion on board and ignore the fanny?

[Satoshi]

12 hours ago, 2426255 said:

Definitely a success in terms of minutes. Do you think he will have a shot at the Chelsea first team next season? Here's a question for you: do you think Norwich would have him back?

Yes he will absolutely have a shot at the Chelsea first team next season. Would the Norwich manager want to have him back? Oh absolutely, he plays him every week. The Norwich fans? Some will, others won't. Some Man Utd fans wanted SAF sacked. Fans are fucking idiots. As we are seeing on this thread.

Don't forget, the idea of him being recalled (or sent home) only to go to the Championship or Rangers isn't new - it was posted repeatedly on this thread last year. And it didn't happen, there's no indication it was even close to happening. Gilmour stayed and forced his way into the first team as Tuchel challenged him to do so.

Other young players, e.g. Ki-Jana Hoever recently, are being slated by their manager for not trying hard enough in training or taking their chance when it comes. Has there ever been any complaints from anyone that Gilmour has a poor attitude? Quite the opposite from what I see.

His loan spell is objectively going better in the second half of the season than it was in the first. As I expected.

10 hours ago, 2426255 said:

A comparison to Norwich's alternative midfielders

On average, Norwich City lose a goal in each half when Billy Gilmour is in the team. I adjusted for minutes played as it's more accurate than a per 90 statistic, but reveals the same story in terms of points gained and goal difference.

Have you thought of looking into actual stats of his performance (e.g. recoveies, pass completion etc.)? Posting the above seems the most simplistic stats available and would get you laughed out the room in any actual data analysis conversation. You don't even have to do it yourself, these stats will be available on google. I won't bother, I've already done extensive comparisons of Gilmour to other Chelsea loanees and the current Chelsea midfielders yet the same inane questions are raised page after page.

Or maybe you're right and 'J Sorensen' is a brilliant player who just happens to be 4 years older than Gilmour and far behind a laonee in the pecking order.

 

Edited March 6, 2022 by Satoshi

[2426255]

9 hours ago, Satoshi said:

Yes he will absolutely have a shot at the Chelsea first team next season. Would the Norwich manager want to have him back? Oh absolutely, he plays him every week. The Norwich fans? Some will, others won't. Some Man Utd fans wanted SAF sacked. Fans are fucking idiots. As we are seeing on this thread.

Don't forget, the idea of him being recalled (or sent home) only to go to the Championship or Rangers isn't new - it was posted repeatedly on this thread last year. And it didn't happen, there's no indication it was even close to happening. Gilmour stayed and forced his way into the first team as Tuchel challenged him to do so.

Other young players, e.g. Ki-Jana Hoever recently, are being slated by their manager for not trying hard enough in training or taking their chance when it comes. Has there ever been any complaints from anyone that Gilmour has a poor attitude? Quite the opposite from what I see.

His loan spell is objectively going better in the second half of the season than it was in the first. As I expected.

Have you thought of looking into actual stats of his performance (e.g. recoveies, pass completion etc.)? Posting the above seems the most simplistic stats available and would get you laughed out the room in any actual data analysis conversation. You don't even have to do it yourself, these stats will be available on google. I won't bother, I've already done extensive comparisons of Gilmour to other Chelsea loanees and the current Chelsea midfielders yet the same inane questions are raised page after page.

Or maybe you're right and 'J Sorensen' is a brilliant player who just happens to be 4 years older than Gilmour and far behind a laonee in the pecking order.

 

How many games have you watched Norwich City play this season?

[Satoshi]

29 minutes ago, 2426255 said:

How many games have you watched Norwich City play this season?

Zero, where I am it's quite difficult to watch live games. I stick to highlights only.

Presumably you have seen more and think he's terrible / should be dropped? Pity their manager disagrees.

[2426255]

16 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

Zero, where I am it's quite difficult to watch live games. I stick to highlights only.

Presumably you have seen more and think he's terrible / should be dropped? Pity their manager disagrees.

What are you basing your opinion on?

[The Moonster]

Sitting making up spreadsheets on a Sunday night so you can get a few bites on an anonymous football forum. Things you love to see.

[Satoshi]

1 hour ago, 2426255 said:

What are you basing your opinion on?

Ouija boards.

Of course, what I have posted doesn't state (or require) me to have seen full Norwich matches.

If Gilmour was as terrible as you say he would be dropped but the opposite is happening - he's started every game he's been eligible for when fully fit* (and 8 straight league starts before his injury).

You chose to address none of the points in my post - which is not surprising, you've been getting everything wrong so far.

I take it you watch every minute Gilmour plays and only spend 2 hours a day making voodoo dolls of him. You're more obsessed about Gilmour, I don't doubt that, just don't apply for a firearms license. 

*To avoid the boring response, this is assuming he wasn't fully fit for the Crysal Palace game, his first on returning from injury when he came off the bench. Even if we assume he was 'dropped', it's 1 game of 12 and he still came off the bench. 

Also important to emphasise, I'm not falling for this troll - I couldn't care less if he's being sincere or not. I'm hardly being sincere myself. But if he's going to post pish I'm happy to waste 5 mins of my life correcting him every so often. He has an unhealthy obsession with Gilmour, I hope it never gets more serious than posting online. 

Edited March 7, 2022 by Satoshi

[2426255]

25 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

Ouija boards.

Of course, what I have posted doesn't state (or require) me to have seen full Norwich matches.

If Gilmour was as terrible as you say he would be dropped but the opposite is happening - he's started every game he's been eligible for when fully fit* (and 8 straight league starts before his injury).

You chose to address none of the points in my post - which is not surprising, you've been getting everything wrong so far.

I take it you watch every minute Gilmour plays and only spend 2 hours a day making voodoo dolls of him. You're more obsessed about Gilmour, I don't doubt that, just don't apply for a firearms license. 

*To avoid the boring response, this is assuming he wasn't fully fit for the Crysal Palace game, his first on returning from injury when he came off the bench. Even if we assume he was 'dropped', it's 1 game of 12 and he still came off the bench. 

Also important to emphasise, I'm not falling for this troll - I couldn't care less if he's being sincere or not. I'm hardly being sincere myself. But if he's going to post pish I'm happy to waste 5 mins of my life correcting him every so often. He has an unhealthy obsession with Gilmour, I hope it never gets more serious than posting online. 

I understand that you're not in a position to watch Billy Gilmour play for Norwich this season which is fine, but if our roles were reversed and I said I'd not watched a single Norwich City game this season you'd probably laugh at me and you'd be right to do so. What else is there to say? 

[Satoshi]

1 hour ago, 2426255 said:

I understand that you're not in a position to watch Billy Gilmour play for Norwich this season which is fine, but if our roles were reversed and I said I'd not watched a single Norwich City game this season you'd probably laugh at me and you'd be right to do so. What else is there to say? 

Except I'm not commenting on his game within the 90 minutes, purely that he is playing (occassionally mentioning what he does on the highlights) and pointing out he is clearly, undeniably, doing better than every other Chelsea loanee at the same age and far better than their two first choice midfielders in Kante and Jorginho at the same age. None of this requires me to watch him play every game, or even any game. Occasionally, I'll throw in how other world class players have had one, or several, mediocre loan spells and it hasn't came to their detriment. Or the public comments of Tuchel in how highly rates Gilmour and how he didn't want to loan him out because he wanted him in the first team squad.

I'm not laughing at you, I really fear your obsession with Gilmour has gone too far and you should probably ease off a bit.

Nor do I think Gilmour should be exempt for criticism, if he had a shocker like Gibson he should be called out for it. If he gets called out for being half arsed in training (like Hoever) or beating up a DJ in a pub, or attacking his girlfriend, you won't see me defending him (quite the opposite in fact). But so far the evidence suggests he is a dilligent professional who has shown plenty of resilience throughout his career.

Like many footballers he will get plenty of abuse online from total weirdos. This is sad behaviour, and even worse when it is directed at someone so young - the abuse of the 19 year old Chinese ice skater being the most horrific recent example. This can make you despair for humanity but not much you can do beyond not participate yourself. Gibson had a poor game but I'm not making spreadsheets of his performances.

I'll make an exception for Roy Keane though, he's been a w****r for decades and is old enough to know better. 

Edited March 7, 2022 by Satoshi

[2426255]

3 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

Except I'm not commenting on his game within the 90 minutes

 

On 06/03/2022 at 10:31, Satoshi said:

Nope, but he didn't have a bad game.

[Satoshi]

4 hours ago, 2426255 said:

 

Is that your smoking gun? Devastating, don't think I'll ever recover.

From what I saw on the highlights he didn't have a bad game.

The game wasn't shown on UK TV (from what I can see, I don't live there anymore), did you watch on full replay?

Wouldn't put such weird creepy behaviour past you tbh.

 

[2426255]

Have you seen Billy in his games for Scotland? @Satoshi

Edited March 7, 2022 by 2426255

[2426255]

Not sure if this has had an effect on decisions to play Billy Gilmour at Norwich City. It would be mad to base team selection around finances - interesting nonetheless though.

Quote

Gilmour’s loan deal from Chelsea does not come with a contractual obligation to play him, but Norwich’s fee reduces the more Gilmour plays.

Of Norwich’s four wins this season, one has come with Gilmour on the pitch. Of their 17 points, six have come with Gilmour’s contribution. On the flip side, only three times this season have Norwich taken points from a game that Pierre Lees-Melou has not started.

He has been unlucky to miss out in recent weeks and it would be interesting to see if the Frenchman alongside Rupp and Mathias Normann could make an impact against Chelsea. If it works, then the midfield to face Leeds may have picked itself.

Michael Bailey, The Athletic

https://theathletic.com/3165235/2022/03/06/thumped-by-brentford-what-do-norwich-do-next-for-chelsea-and-leeds/?source=emp_shared_article

Edited March 7, 2022 by 2426255