Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, scinnell said:

I would rather us get Will Hughes if we need to look at Watford. At least he has some bite in the middle of the park. Underwhelming though.

Maybe Watford don't want to sell him or loan him out?

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, foxfanazer said:

Ah OK. Close down the transfer section of Foxestalk then, the opinion police have spoken

 

Jesus you get up on the wrong side of the bed or something?? Calm down mate getting your knickers in twist. All I said was to trust the scouts that's rarely let us down. 

Guest bss9401
Posted

Would be an indicator of our ambition for this season I guess.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Steve Earle said:

Is Gilmour an AM though? Thought he was a DM or a 6?

I am pretty sure he was the player who would come in for Jorginho, in the DM/6 role

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, goose2010 said:

Jesus you get up on the wrong side of the bed or something?? Calm down mate getting your knickers in twist. All I said was to trust the scouts that's rarely let us down. 

You was the one that started with the sarcasm mate. They do rarely get it wrong but it does happen. This is just another Ryan Bennett type signing and completely uninspiring IMO. 

Posted
25 minutes ago, NasPb said:

this would be a very very stupid move and would show our lack of preparation in all truth. No one was expecting a praet injury but if we really sign this lad on any basis, then i think youve ought to question how prepared we were coming into january. I dont think this is real though thankfully. If we bring rodgers a championship level cdm when he asked for a CAM several times then wed just be silly. Id prefer to sign no one than sign this lad. Hope this isnt a trend towards panic buying in january

You think one of the most prepared teams in terms of transfers is suddenly unprepared. Or is it just possible it’s very hard to do any business at the moment. Pandemic and all.

 

People seem to forget you can’t just sign anyone you want. 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Steve Earle said:

So not what we need or are looking for then?!

Nope, if anything its even weirder than Chalobah as Gilmour has pretty much exclusively been a DM, where as Chalobah plays in a 2 with Hughes

  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, foxfanazer said:

You was the one that started with the sarcasm mate. They do rarely get it wrong but it does happen. This is just another Ryan Bennett type signing and completely uninspiring IMO. 

Because clearly there are few options available. 

Posted
Just now, Babylon said:

Because clearly there are few options available. 

Which is fine, would rather we didn't sign anyone in that case. Don't see why Gilmour wouldn't be seen as a better option though

Guest Chocolate Teapot
Posted
2 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Because clearly there are few options available. 

Well we have one here. Hamza.

Posted

Just chatting about this to someone I know who is a Watford fan.  We both wonder if there's more to this than a cover signing. Rodgers is the kind of manager who would think he can fix Chalobah and if he can reach his potential for a few million quid it could be inspired.

 

I doubt he can reach that potential but stranger things have happened.

Posted
3 minutes ago, foxfanazer said:

Which is fine, would rather we didn't sign anyone in that case. Don't see why Gilmour wouldn't be seen as a better option though

I think Gilmour would obviously be a better option, if he were an option (which he's almost certainly not, since Chelsea would never do that).

 

Personally I don't see how Chalobah helps us, frankly.  Insurance if Ndidi and Mendy both get hurt?  Honestly I'd just keep Choudhury as an emergency break glass defensive MF.  We need an attacker and this guy unequivocally isn't that.  But picking up quality guys in January isn't easy.

Posted
1 minute ago, Foxy_Bear said:

Billy Gilour isn't a defensive midfielder. He's a #8. 

IF we’re interested, I hope you’re right. I’ve certainly seen him play 6, can’t recall seeing him as an 8. 
Can’t see why Chelsea would loan us one of their promising youngsters when we’re direct rivals for 4th place.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Steve Earle said:

IF we’re interested, I hope you’re right. I’ve certainly seen him play 6, can’t recall seeing him as an 8. 
Can’t see why Chelsea would loan us one of their promising youngsters when we’re direct rivals for 4th place.

Can't see something that isn't there.

  • Haha 1
Posted

Is it just me that sees Gilmour as a similar kind of player (but not as good as) as Tielemans in the deeper play-making role? Dictating play from deep but also getting forward every now and then?

  • Like 2
Posted

The source is usally quite reliable so probably some truth in this. Percy does say options though so I'd be hoping for someone a bit better than this. A few years ago maybe but he's not surely the level we need right now even as back up.

 

May as well stay with what we have.

 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...