Billy Gilmour - Page 6 - TA specific - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Billy Gilmour


Taylor1996

Recommended Posts

Last night was not his best however imo this was down to him being in wrong position. He needs to be main man in number 6 position getting ball off defenders where last night in 1st half both him and kante were in same positions all time. 2nd half kante played in the 6 with gilmour playing further forward in the 8 and as pitch was bad chelsea went longer more often. Even with this he was involved in goal and great pass to abraham that should have been a penalty.  He will I am sure be in our team very soon if he gets played in correct position and I feel he has to show it at training as tuchel stateshe is 4th in line at the moment. We are not getting too excited with him as imo he is destined for the very top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ThistleWhistle said:

Would be interesting to compare his stats to Kante's because he was pish all night.  Ziyech and Pulisic were even worse.

 

 

His stats are damning.

Dispossessed 4 times.

Dribbled past 2 time.

Tackles 0/2

1 dribble, one shot at goal(off target) 82% pass success rate and 2 interceptions are pretty poor for a player in his position.

 

Kante's stats

Dispossessed 2 times

Dribbled past 0 times

Tackles  4/4

3 dribbles no shots at goal 86% pass success rate and one interception.

Kante saw slightly more of the ball but they both saw more of it other than anyone bar two of Chelsea's central defenders

So they both had every chance to do something.

 As for his pass in the build up to the goal, Reece James was in acres of space so it was a pretty run of the mill ball.

Gilmour is ten times better than he was last night and hopefully he will get chance to prove that soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ceudmilefailte said:

His stats are damning.

Dispossessed 4 times.

Dribbled past 2 time.

Tackles 0/2

1 dribble, one shot at goal(off target) 82% pass success rate and 2 interceptions are pretty poor for a player in his position.

 

Kante's stats

Dispossessed 2 times

Dribbled past 0 times

Tackles  4/4

3 dribbles no shots at goal 86% pass success rate and one interception.

Kante saw slightly more of the ball but they both saw more of it other than anyone bar two of Chelsea's central defenders

So they both had every chance to do something.

 As for his pass in the build up to the goal, Reece James was in acres of space so it was a pretty run of the mill ball.

Gilmour is ten times better than he was last night and hopefully he will get chance to prove that soon.

 

 

I watched the game and was surprised to see how poor his rating was on the fitba app i use (FotMob). Looking at it in more detail it lists Gilmour as making ZERO key passes, which is obviously pish as he made 2 (one for the Abraham penalty that never was, and one for the through ball leading to the goal).

 

How much is a key pass worth in your stats algorithm? Has to be a lot surely.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Dave78 said:

 

 

I watched the game and was surprised to see how poor his rating was on the fitba app i use (FotMob). Looking at it in more detail it lists Gilmour as making ZERO key passes, which is obviously pish as he made 2 (one for the Abraham penalty that never was, and one for the through ball leading to the goal).

 

How much is a key pass worth in your stats algorithm? Has to be a lot surely. The Abraham ball would probably only be seen as a key pass if it had ended up as a penalty. Were do you draw the line

 

The pass in the goal build up probably isn't seen as a key pass, it was a pretty simple ball. You probably cant give points for "it should have been a penalty" much the same as you don't get points for "that was never offside"

Perhaps if his  pass to Abraham had been better he would have scored.

Not sure how the weighting works, but I am sure the ability to head the ball is over rated.

Edited by ceudmilefailte
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

The pass in the goal build up probably isn't seen as a key pass, it was a pretty simple ball. You probably cant give points for "it should have been a penalty" much the same as you don't get points for "that was never offside"

Perhaps if his  pass to Abraham had been better he would have scored.

Not sure how the weighting works, but I am sure the ability to head the ball is over rated.

His pass to Abraham was perfect and effectively ripped the defence open and it took a foul to prevent Abraham from getting the shot off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ceudmilefailte said:

The pass in the goal build up probably isn't seen as a key pass, it was a pretty simple ball. You probably cant give points for "it should have been a penalty" much the same as you don't get points for "that was never offside"

Perhaps if his  pass to Abraham had been better he would have scored.

Not sure how the weighting works, but I am sure the ability to head the ball is over rated.

I wouldn’t call the pass to James “simple”. It’s a perfectly weighted ball to a fullback running at full pelt, didn’t need to break stride or overstretch. For me it’s the moments before it, the first touch to open up then the awareness to delay the pass so the defender doesn’t have a chance to cut it out. It’s those glimpses of ability and decision making which make him a special talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SWMM82 said:

I wouldn’t call the pass to James “simple”. It’s a perfectly weighted ball to a fullback running at full pelt, didn’t need to break stride or overstretch. For me it’s the moments before it, the first touch to open up then the awareness to delay the pass so the defender doesn’t have a chance to cut it out. It’s those glimpses of ability and decision making which make him a special talent.

He is a special talent but he had a poor game, that's all I've said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ceudmilefailte said:

The pass in the goal build up probably isn't seen as a key pass, it was a pretty simple ball. You probably cant give points for "it should have been a penalty" much the same as you don't get points for "that was never offside"

Perhaps if his  pass to Abraham had been better he would have scored.

Not sure how the weighting works, but I am sure the ability to head the ball is over rated.

If those aren't 'key passes' (which i'm pretty sure is a different classification to assists), then what the hell are?

Edited by Dave78
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dave78 said:

If those aren't 'key passes' (which i'm pretty sure is a different classification to assists), then what the hell are?

According to who scored

Key Pass

- The final pass leading to a shot at goal from a teammate.

ie would have been a goal if the shooter had been any good, if he had it would then become an assist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

According to who scored

Key Pass

- The final pass leading to a shot at goal from a teammate.

ie would have been a goal if the shooter had been any good, if he had it would then become an assist.

Ahh ok, thanks.

Still, in my mind Gilmour made 2 key passes. 

This is another example of how your beloved stats lie to you Ceud :ok:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He will have learnt a lot from last night’s game. Barnsley were well-drilled pressing high up the pitch. And it didn’t help that Chelsea were continuously passing it across the back then punting up the park, completely bypassing the midfield. But the rare times that Chelsea did threaten he was more often than not involved in the build up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Dave78 said:

Ahh ok, thanks.

Still, in my mind Gilmour made 2 key passes. 

This is another example of how your beloved stats lie to you Ceud :ok:

Well the stats do say that McBurnie is the best non scoring striker in the EPL so perhaps they don't tell the whole truth😉

 

Edited by ceudmilefailte
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SWMM82 said:

He will have learnt a lot from last night’s game. Barnsley were well-drilled pressing high up the pitch. And it didn’t help that Chelsea were continuously passing it across the back then punting up the park, completely bypassing the midfield. But the rare times that Chelsea did threaten he was more often than not involved in the build up.

Gilmour is one of those players who will be able to thrive under a high press with his quick feet and football brain. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/12/2021 at 2:13 PM, gaz7 said:

Last night was not his best however imo this was down to him being in wrong position. He needs to be main man in number 6 position getting ball off defenders where last night in 1st half both him and kante were in same positions all time. 2nd half kante played in the 6 with gilmour playing further forward in the 8 and as pitch was bad chelsea went longer more often. Even with this he was involved in goal and great pass to abraham that should have been a penalty.  He will I am sure be in our team very soon if he gets played in correct position and I feel he has to show it at training as tuchel stateshe is 4th in line at the moment. We are not getting too excited with him as imo he is destined for the very top.

Chelsea played a 3-4-3. I was thinking that we could easily adapt to that formation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/12/2021 at 8:10 PM, ceudmilefailte said:

His stats are damning.

Dispossessed 4 times.

Dribbled past 2 time.

Tackles 0/2

1 dribble, one shot at goal(off target) 82% pass success rate and 2 interceptions are pretty poor for a player in his position.

 

Kante's stats

Dispossessed 2 times

Dribbled past 0 times

Tackles  4/4

3 dribbles no shots at goal 86% pass success rate and one interception.

Kante saw slightly more of the ball but they both saw more of it other than anyone bar two of Chelsea's central defenders

So they both had every chance to do something.

 As for his pass in the build up to the goal, Reece James was in acres of space so it was a pretty run of the mill ball.

Gilmour is ten times better than he was last night and hopefully he will get chance to prove that soon.

Kante's stats are hardly brilliant either for someone with far more experience and is more a ball winning centre midfielder capable of playing in a two.  The formation hung him and Gilmour out to dry really as the 2 in centre midfield were constantly covering the left hand side where Hudson- Odoi is never in a million years a wing back and their front three essentially  never wanted to track back.  

For me it was typical new manager putting a square peg in a round hole as if to justify why he's not been in the squad.  Games are coming thick and fast though so hopefully he gets more game time in a centre three.  Another saving grace is it'll be interesting to see who leaves first as Gilmour's stock is high enough he'd get a decent move even on loan whilst early signs wouldn't suggest he'll be around long-term as seems bat shit mental.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Third Lanark said:

Chelsea played a 3-4-3. I was thinking that we could easily adapt to that formation.

For me you've got to have the players for it - Stoke tried it and was absolutely horrendous.  You either end up with the wing backs making a 5 all the time and the two centre midfielders chasing shadows unless the wingers track back or; the midfield two have to cover for the wing backs if they're too attacking meaning the team is all over the shop.  Stoke always seemed to either end up with the front three goal hanging and not tracking back or; dropping too deep turning it into a horrible 5-4-1 lumping it at an exposed unit.  Unless Stoke players are just thick but the coach at the time tried it for a good two months and they got progressively worse at it! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, ThistleWhistle said:

For me you've got to have the players for it - Stoke tried it and was absolutely horrendous.  You either end up with the wing backs making a 5 all the time and the two centre midfielders chasing shadows unless the wingers track back or; the midfield two have to cover for the wing backs if they're too attacking meaning the team is all over the shop.  Stoke always seemed to either end up with the front three goal hanging and not tracking back or; dropping too deep turning it into a horrible 5-4-1 lumping it at an exposed unit.  Unless Stoke players are just thick but the coach at the time tried it for a good two months and they got progressively worse at it! 

That would be my concern with a 343. That it would end up a 541.

Our current 5311 suits the way we play at the moment. Especially with 2 of the 3 CBs being very comfortable on the ball, stepping forward into midfield and being able to pick out a pass. 

The 3-1 in midfield allows us to turn it into a 4 and pack the centre of the pitch which makes us more solid defensively but also allows us to press which is where our attacking joy has come from.

The main issue with the formation is when we are dominating possession as it doesnt allow us to create enough currently. Will be interesting to see how Clarke changes it for teams ranked lower than us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Taylor1996 said:

The 2 strikers are as important as the 3 at the back.

The more strikers we have, the more opposition defenders they will occupy, thus, meaning that our midfielders will get more space.

It has to be a variable of 3-5-2, with the 3 and the 2 being non-negotiable. 

I agree to an extent but I wouldnt say we defo play with 2 strikers. From memory we have tended to start with either Fraser or Christie so its more like a 5311. 

Against lesser teams we could play 2 actual strikers and perhaps sacrifice the defensive mid with somebody slightly more attacking. Ie replace Jack with Armstrong / Turnbull / Gilmour for example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

I agree to an extent but I wouldnt say we defo play with 2 strikers. From memory we have tended to start with either Fraser or Christie so its more like a 5311. 

Against lesser teams we could play 2 actual strikers and perhaps sacrifice the defensive mid with somebody slightly more attacking. Ie replace Jack with Armstrong / Turnbull / Gilmour for example. 

Yeah. It's usually Dykes (main striker) and a second striker that comes deep when we don't have possession.  It's a good system.

Agreed. And with runners from midfield, like McTominay or McGregor, it could be very effective against lesser teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Interesting to see that N.Ireland have capped Ethan Galbraith.

He's now played as many matches for N.Ireland as he has Manchester United (one).

He might be playing tonight in the dead rubber against Sociedad, but he's playing u23s football.

Same age as Gilmour. Fine, it's not entirely the same, as we have better options in midfield than N.Ireland, but I loathe the attitude that a player has to have played 100+ matches to get a chance with the national team.

Gilmour should be in the squad for the World Cup qualifiers and Euro 2020, even if he's warming the Chelsea bench.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/25/2021 at 5:05 PM, Taylor1996 said:

Interesting to see that N.Ireland have capped Ethan Galbraith.

He's now played as many matches for N.Ireland as he has Manchester United (one).

He might be playing tonight in the dead rubber against Sociedad, but he's playing u23s football.

Same age as Gilmour. Fine, it's not entirely the same, as we have better options in midfield than N.Ireland, but I loathe the attitude that a player has to have played 100+ matches to get a chance with the national team.

Gilmour should be in the squad for the World Cup qualifiers and Euro 2020, even if he's warming the Chelsea bench.

Agree about the attitude. Hell, even England fast-tracked the likes of Sancho and Foden before they were properly established at their clubs and no doubt it aided their development.

But in Scotland? You have to have played 200 games so there's time to call you pish before being capped.

Nathan PaTTerson and Gilmour would undoubtedly enhance our quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Third Lanark said:

Agree about the attitude. Hell, even England fast-tracked the likes of Sancho and Foden before they were properly established at their clubs and no doubt it aided their development.

But in Scotland? You have to have played 200 games so there's time to call you pish before being capped.

Nathan PaTTerson and Gilmour would undoubtedly enhance our quality.

Foden had played 2 seasons worth of football at man city before he was capped. Are you suggesting we just cap some kid because he plays a couple of games for his club. We would be capping thirty or more youngsters every year in that case and our first team would be a joke. 

Gilmour is being considered for a call up to the squad and rightly so, if he was at any other epl team outside the top 6 he would he a starter. 

Patterson is no for me, he needs a run of games before calling him up. Playing a few appearances off the bench for rangers is not justification for a call up despite us having poor options at rb. 

 

Edited by mccaughey85
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...