Billy Gilmour

[Texas Pete]

2 hours ago, killiefaetheferry said:

That was my thinking too 😂. If it was only to 'get minutes into his legs' they'd have waited for the concussion check and he'd have been back on. He's playing. Clarke must have shat himself when Gilmour got clattered. Gilmour, McGinn and McTominay are the 3 midfield nail-ins for me. Room for 2 more in the attacking areas.

If he was definitely playing next Monday I think he’d probably have started yesterday. He certainly did his chances no harm yesterday but Clarke has such a boner for McGregor I can’t see him not starting. 

[Tartan blood]

51 minutes ago, Hercules Rockefeller said:

Absolutely agree re. Gilmour having proven himself. He was one of the best players on the park when he came into the starting line-up against Man City; zero chance McGregor would look remotely at that level if he was thrown into that fixture.

It was ear-bleeding stuff listening to the dinosaur Willie Miller on Sportsound imply picking McGregor for the Czech game was a no-brainer. He's clearly exhausted, been out-of-form for over a year and does little to affect the outcome of games. McGregor complements Jack when both in the team, otherwise Gilmour is the obvious choice.

I sometimes think McGregor has coasted on reputation alone. The fact he plays 60 games a season and was complimented by Rodgers means he must be good. But I've heard very little justification as to why he actually deserves to be playing for Scotland or even Celtic. 

"Compliment" is giving McGregor a bit too much credit. Jack does all the hard work, letting McGregor off the hook.

I'd even play Armstrong or Fleck ahead of McGregor in the holding role. But Gilmour would be my first choice.

[Taylor1996]

4 hours ago, Tartan blood said:

There is a moment in that 2nd video where he does a sliding interception in the middle of the park. I don't think I've ever seen McGregor do that. 

The one game in the last few years where I've seen McGregor getting stuck in and making tackles was against Rangers and he was red carded after half an hour. I think McGregor, in general, knows his limitations and that is why he always keeps it safe. I think it's really only recently that McGregor is finally being criticised for what he doesn't bring to the team. It's not so much that McGregor plays poorly, it's more that he rarely, if ever, contributes anything note worthy.

I know I bang this drum a lot, but it is more pertinent than ever, because we have a world class player in Gilmour that already should be playing ahead of him.

Couldn't agree more.

I used to criticize Callum McGregor for always passing backwards and sideways and always keeping it safe, but I suppose, every team needs that, so i started laying off him.

Remember him at Notts County? He played just off the striker, I think that is his best position, sadly, you can say that about the majority of our midfielders. 

He hasn't got a good passing range, certainly not good enough to be playing in a deep midfield position. 

There's no doubt, though, if it's a straight choice, Gilmour should win. Is he ready? Definitely.

Edited June 7, 2021 by Taylor1996

[Tartan blood]

50 minutes ago, Taylor1996 said:

Couldn't agree more.

I used to criticize Callum McGregor for always passing backwards and sideways and always keeping it safe, but I suppose, every team needs that, so i started laying off him.

Remember him at Notts County? He played just off the striker, I think that is his best position, sadly, you can say that about the majority of our midfielders. 

He hasn't got a good passing range, certainly not good enough to be playing in a deep midfield position. 

There's no doubt, though, if it's a straight choice, Gilmour should win. Is he ready? Definitely.

Every team does need a player to distribute the ball. But at international level there just isn't room for players that bring just 1 attribute. Do I trust McGregor to fight to the death, track runners, or make challenges in front of the box when we are under the cosh? No. Whereas, I would trust just about every other midfielder we have to do that if required. Including the attacking mids.

McGregor is an attacking midfielder. He has mistakenly been placed in the wrong position for the last 5 years. But if he was only seen as an attacking mid, he'd not be selected, for Celtic or Scotland.

I did say I was going to lay off him as well, which I will do shortly, it's only because he is potentially in direct competition with a vastly superior player in Gilmour that it has become extremely relevant. But, I'll fully get behind him when he plays in the Euros. Everyone will be given a fresh start (by me).

[Taylor1996]

8 minutes ago, Tartan blood said:

Every team does need a player to distribute the ball. But at international level there just isn't room for players that bring just 1 attribute. Do I trust McGregor to fight to the death, track runners, or make challenges in front of the box when we are under the cosh? No. Whereas, I would trust just about every other midfielder we have to do that if required. Including the attacking mids.

McGregor is an attacking midfielder. He has mistakenly been placed in the wrong position for the last 5 years. But if he was only seen as an attacking mid, he'd not be selected, for Celtic or Scotland.

I did say I was going to lay off him as well, which I will do shortly, it's only because he is potentially in direct competition with a vastly superior player in Gilmour that it has become extremely relevant. But, I'll fully get behind him when he plays in the Euros. Everyone will be given a fresh start (by me).

Yeah. I wouldn't trust him to do those things, either. In fairness, though, I don't think any of our midfielders are good with the press. You seen it against Austria and Israel. All three goals we conceded could've been avoided if one of the pilot's pressed. It actually happened yesterday. Then there was the first Dutch goal, with no one filling the gap.

The anchorman position is a problem. As much as I like McTominay, he ain't a prototypical anchorman. Maybe Gilmour might be the answer. 

Agreed. I've been saying that for years. He actually reminds me of Jesse Lingard. He takes pelters from United fans, whilst not playing his preferred position. He was at West Ham, playing an attacking role... bam! He hits form.

It's a good point. Gilmour will shine a torch on a lot of our midfielders that we thought were good, but pale when compared to Gilmour. It's a good thing, though, as it puts things into perspective. 

[Blantyre_Braveheart]

17 minutes ago, Taylor1996 said:

Yeah. I wouldn't trust him to do those things, either. In fairness, though, I don't think any of our midfielders are good with the press. You seen it against Austria and Israel. All three goals we conceded could've been avoided if one of the pilot's pressed. It actually happened yesterday. Then there was the first Dutch goal, with no one filling the gap.

The anchorman position is a problem. As much as I like McTominay, he ain't a prototypical anchorman. Maybe Gilmour might be the answer. 

Agreed. I've been saying that for years. He actually reminds me of Jesse Lingard. He takes pelters from United fans, whilst not playing his preferred position. He was at West Ham, playing an attacking role... bam! He hits form.

It's a good point. Gilmour will shine a torch on a lot of our midfielders that we thought were good, but pale when compared to Gilmour. It's a good thing, though, as it puts things into perspective. 

In fairness to McGregor, it was Turnbull who lost Depay and failed to track him afterwards.

While the goal was Turnbull's mistake, you can't really blame him as he isn't a CDM and he is only 21.

On CDM, While Ryan Jack isn't a great player, he is our best CDM and central midfield isn't always about the best players, it's about the best some of their parts. 

We need to find a midfield that works best for Scotland. Tbh I'm not sure who is involved or where they play, but it probably won't be McTominay at LCM, McGinn at RCM or McGregor lying deep centrally. They all had poor games and really didn't suit the roles they had to play. 

I'd have McTominay at RCM, McGinn at CM/CAM and probably Gilmour at LCM.

If it was just about playing the best players in midfield then England wouldn't have failed as miserably with Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes.

 

Edited June 7, 2021 by Blantyre_Braveheart

[Diamond Scot]

5 hours ago, Tartan blood said:

McTominay was poor yesterday and McGinn was relatively quiet. The difference is that McTominay at his best gets man of the match in European finals, and McGinn at his best will drag us to victories. Both have cash in the bank to ensure they keep their place. McGregor at his best gets pass marks. Maybe that is too harsh on him, but Gilmour has already proven himself against some of the best teams in world football e.g Liverpool and Man City. Lampard and Tuchel trust him in big games. I hope Clarke will, too.

Im Gilmours biggest fannbut neither Lampard nor Tuchel trust him in big games. Not yet anyway. He has pretty much been used in cup games and then in EPL games towards the end of the season when Chelsea had midfielders injured or resting due to upcoming finals.

Gilmour is an amazing player and imo will be our best player in a long long time however he hasnt played in the calibre of games that Mctom, McGinn and even McGreggor have.

If he is selected it will be on the basis of his talent alone. Thats a risk in one view for the 1st and most winnable game of a major tourney.

[Taylor1996]

2 minutes ago, Blantyre_Braveheart said:

In fairness to McGregor, it was Turnbull who lost Depay and failed to track him afterwards.

While the goal was Turnbull's mistake, you can't really blame him as he isn't a CDM and he is only 21.

On CDM, While Ryan Jack isn't a great player, he is our best CDM and central midfield isn't always about the best players, it's about the best some of their parts. 

We need to find a midfield that works best for Scotland. Tbh I'm not sure who is involved or where they play, but it probably won't be McTominay at LCM, McGinn at RCM or McGregor lying deep centrally. They all had poor games and really didn't suit the roles they had to play. 

I'd have McTominay at RCM, McGinn at CM/CAM and probably Gilmour at LCM.

If it was just about playing the best players in midfield then England wouldn't have failed as miserably with Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes.

 

Yeah. It was Turnbull. I wasn't blaming McGregor, this time.  Just highlighting that the pivot has to be more aware.

Agreed. That's why I wanted Graeme Shinnie in the squad. Best player? Certainly not, but at least he can smell danger and he has a certain amount if football intelligence. 

Yeah. It was an off colour performance. I'm sure if we watched it again then it wouldn't seem quite as lacklustre. But yeah, I agree. One positive is, even when we look off the pace, we still look sturdy. Might not seem like much, but sturdy can take you a long way.

Yep. 

[Third Lanark]

4 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Im Gilmours biggest fannbut neither Lampard nor Tuchel trust him in big games. Not yet anyway. He has pretty much been used in cup games and then in EPL games towards the end of the season when Chelsea had midfielders injured or resting due to upcoming finals.

Gilmour is an amazing player and imo will be our best player in a long long time however he hasnt played in the calibre of games that Mctom, McGinn and even McGreggor have.

If he is selected it will be on the basis of his talent alone. Thats a risk in one view for the 1st and most winnable game of a major tourney.

Also don't forget he is competing with Kante, Kovacic and even Jorginho! That's some experienced competition to contend with, so it's not just about not trusting. I'd trust him right now though...

[aaid]

20 minutes ago, Third Lanark said:

Also don't forget he is competing with Kante, Kovacic and even Jorginho! That's some experienced competition to contend with, so it's not just about not trusting. I'd trust him right now though...

Those stating that Tuchell doesn't trust him for big games miss the obvious point.  Gilmour isn't a better option for Chelsea than either of those three right now although he may well replace one of them in the medium to long term, possibly sooner depending on transfer activity in the summer.

It's false equivalence though as with Kante your taking about someone with 45 caps for France who's a world cup winner as well as winning every domestic trophy going, Kovacic has 67 caps for Croatia and has a world cup runners up medal and Jorginho who has 28 caps for Italy.

All three would walk into the Scotland team but he's not competing with them for a spot in the midfield, he's competing with Callum McGregor, Scott McTominey, John McGinn, Stuart Armstrong and David Turnbull.    That's what people need to consider, is the team better with him in it or not compared to those players.

[Diamond Scot]

22 minutes ago, aaid said:

Those stating that Tuchell doesn't trust him for big games miss the obvious point.  Gilmour isn't a better option for Chelsea than either of those three right now although he may well replace one of them in the medium to long term, possibly sooner depending on transfer activity in the summer.

It's false equivalence though as with Kante your taking about someone with 45 caps for France who's a world cup winner as well as winning every domestic trophy going, Kovacic has 67 caps for Croatia and has a world cup runners up medal and Jorginho who has 28 caps for Italy.

All three would walk into the Scotland team but he's not competing with them for a spot in the midfield, he's competing with Callum McGregor, Scott McTominey, John McGinn, Stuart Armstrong and David Turnbull.    That's what people need to consider, is the team better with him in it or not compared to those players.

The original point made was that Lampard and Tuchel trust Gilmour to play in big games. There is zero evidence of that. In fact the opposite is true because he never made the bench for most of Tuchels champions league run, opting instead to put 2 left backs in there. Tuchel also stated Gilmour was 4th choice out of 4 centre mids but when 2 of the centre mids werent available for one of the big EPL games, he opted to drop Mount back to CM and kept Gilmour on the bench.

Thats not to say Tuchel doesnt rate Gilmour as he clearly does because he has played in other matches and is in the 1st team squad.

Will Gilmour be better than McGreggor? Almost certainly. 

Is he better than him now? Probably

Is he a better option to start in Scotlands most winnable game in a major tourney without having ever started for Scotland, only ever playing about 40 mins at International level, only starting a handful of semi meaningful games for Chelsea and having never played jn a real top level pressure game? Thats not as clear cut.

Id start him though as id rather be bold and possibly lose than play it safe.

[Dodger]

Hope the pro Gilmour sentiment doesn't start to turn into an anti Mcgregor sentiment. Starting to feel like there's an element waiting on Mcgregor making a mistake to force Clarke into playing Gilmour. 

I'd probably gamble with Gilmour but the reality is that Mcgregor will start against the Czechs. Will be a downer if our first game in a major tournament for 23 years is remembered for fans getting on the back of one of our players. 

[Tartan blood]

6 minutes ago, Dodger said:

Hope the pro Gilmour sentiment doesn't start to turn into an anti Mcgregor sentiment. Starting to feel like there's an element waiting on Mcgregor making a mistake to force Clarke into playing Gilmour. 

I'd probably gamble with Gilmour but the reality is that Mcgregor will start against the Czechs. Will be a downer if our first game in a major tournament for 23 years is remembered for fans getting on the back of one of our players. 

You're right and I am guilty of that. Though I was firmly against playing McGregor long before Gilmour became a viable option.

Anyway, I made my peace with the fact McGregor will probably start a while ago. Gilmour's caps have re-awoken the fire in me though. But there are valid concerns over playing Gilmour that Diamond Scot mentioned above. 

If Gilmour plays, great, I fully support that decision. If McGregor plays, I'll be fully behind him as well.

[Taylor1996]

31 minutes ago, Dodger said:

Hope the pro Gilmour sentiment doesn't start to turn into an anti Mcgregor sentiment. Starting to feel like there's an element waiting on Mcgregor making a mistake to force Clarke into playing Gilmour. 

I'd probably gamble with Gilmour but the reality is that Mcgregor will start against the Czechs. Will be a downer if our first game in a major tournament for 23 years is remembered for fans getting on the back of one of our players. 

Agreed.

I'm against us giving any Scotland player a hard time... without due reason. 

I may not be a fan of Armstrong or Adams, but it's time to put politics aside and support the entire team. That's exactly what I'll be doing.

[Haggis_trap]

Gilmour reminds of me of a young Tierney - it was obvious from young age that both players were ready...

On the few occasions I have seen Gilmour he has been outstanding.  Pat Nevin certainly believes he is the real deal from watching him train every day.  However : I can understand Clarkes reticence to chuck in a young player at deep-end when he has only had 11 games this season.  

I dont think Gilmour will start against Czechs - but I am sure he will get some minutes during the tournament.

[Tartan blood]

41 minutes ago, Haggis_trap said:

Gilmour reminds of me of a young Tierney - it was obvious from young age that both players were ready...

On the few occasions I have seen Gilmour he has been outstanding.  Pat Nevin certainly believes he is the real deal from watching him train every day.  However : I can understand Clarkes reticence to chuck in a young player at deep-end when he has only had 11 games this season.  

I dont think Gilmour will start against Czechs - but I am sure he will get some minutes during the tournament.

Very true. Some players, and Scots in particular, take longer to bloom and we often get surprise internationalists. In the current group you might say Nisbet, McLean, O'Donnell, Gallagher came along unexpectedly.

However, I remember seeing a clip of Tierney at 16/17 scoring from the edge of his own box in the youths. So, something like 70 yards out. Then he broke his leg. But you just knew he was special and immediately supplanted Izaguirre the moment he was fit. He is close to man of the match in almost every game he plays. Gilmour has that same look. I'll be shocked if he doesn't become a Scotland regular.

[Burj_Alba]

1 hour ago, Haggis_trap said:

Gilmour reminds of me of a young Tierney - it was obvious from young age that both players were ready...

On the few occasions I have seen Gilmour he has been outstanding.  Pat Nevin certainly believes he is the real deal from watching him train every day.  However : I can understand Clarkes reticence to chuck in a young player at deep-end when he has only had 11 games this season.  

I dont think Gilmour will start against Czechs - but I am sure he will get some minutes during the tournament.

Think he will be a sub and on at half time depending on the match situation.

Clarke knows his team now and unless anybody gets injured it will be McGregor, McTominay, McGinn and possibly Christie or Armstrong in a midfield four. Bit of flexibility for any substitutions. 

[AlfieMoon]

2 hours ago, Dodger said:

Hope the pro Gilmour sentiment doesn't start to turn into an anti Mcgregor sentiment. Starting to feel like there's an element waiting on Mcgregor making a mistake to force Clarke into playing Gilmour. 

I'd probably gamble with Gilmour but the reality is that Mcgregor will start against the Czechs. Will be a downer if our first game in a major tournament for 23 years is remembered for fans getting on the back of one of our players. 

Yep. A very fair point. McGregor has served us well and at 28 years old has a few good years ahead of him. 
 

If we’re building for continuity then you need a squad. I don’t think Clarke will ditch McGregor from the starting 11 against the Czechs. Incidentally I think Gilmour is a great player to have coming off the bench. 
 

I think everyone expects Clarke to be loyal to the players that have got us here but I suppose seeing these players for the past few weeks, every day, he’ll notice which players are flying with the incentive of playing these games. It’ll give him food for thought at least. 

[Tartan blood]

2 hours ago, AlfieMoon said:

 

I think everyone expects Clarke to be loyal to the players that have got us here but I suppose seeing these players for the past few weeks, every day, he’ll notice which players are flying with the incentive of playing these games. It’ll give him food for thought at least. 

It is a bit of an odd label that Clarke has been branded with, that he is overly loyal or is inflexible. Clarke has shown time and time again he is willing to switch players. We all thought Gallagher was a guaranteed starter but has been shunted much further down the pecking order of late. The centre back trio has been different so many times that I think you could pull names out of a hat and have just as much success at guessing who will be chosen.

I love the mystery of not knowing who will be starting, but also having the comfort of being able to trust Clarke's decisions

[aaid]

2 hours ago, AlfieMoon said:

I think everyone expects Clarke to be loyal to the players that have got us here but I suppose seeing these players for the past few weeks, every day, he’ll notice which players are flying with the incentive of playing these games. It’ll give him food for thought at least. 

Jock Stein used to say you wear your overalls for the qualifiers but keep your best suits for the finals.

 

[thesaint]

5 hours ago, Dodger said:

Hope the pro Gilmour sentiment doesn't start to turn into an anti Mcgregor sentiment. Starting to feel like there's an element waiting on Mcgregor making a mistake to force Clarke into playing Gilmour. 

I'd probably gamble with Gilmour but the reality is that Mcgregor will start against the Czechs. Will be a downer if our first game in a major tournament for 23 years is remembered for fans getting on the back of one of our players. 

Yep.Gilmour looks fantastic,but what is it about this forum that it has to have a scapegoat.McBurnie isn't there anymore,so a new culprit has to be found.The main player that is getting the abuse is McGregor,followed closely by Forrest.Let's give our total support to every player that is representing us.I never liked Adams getting selectedand still don'tbut i will give him my support when he is out on that pitch.They are all playing for us.WE ARE SCOTLAND.C'MON

[Toepoke]

I'm sure Billy will feature prominently in the tournament, even if he doesn't start against the Czechs. Remember with the extra subs 16 players can appear in each game. And what a talent to bring off the bench!

 

[Tartan blood]

10 hours ago, aaid said:

Jock Stein used to say you wear your overalls for the qualifiers but keep your best suits for the finals.

 

Great quote. 

For other nations, bringing along players for the experience to stand them in good stead for future tournaments makes sense because they qualify regularly, but there is no guarantee that we will qualify again any time soon. I'm sure that isn't lost on Clarke. So if two 19 year olds and a 21 year old are the most talented in their position, I don't think Clarke will necessarily be againt using them, at least from the bench.

[KirkieRobRoy]

In tournaments there's often young players who really emerge and make an impact. It would be great if it was one of ours for a change.

[Burj_Alba]

Gilmour = the Ardrossan Mbappe

You heard it here first.