Chelsea’s decision to sell midfielder Billy Gilmour to Brighton & Hove Albion in the transfer window was taken by chairman Todd Boehly and the board, rather than Thomas Tuchel, according to journalist Simon Phillips.

Tuchel oversaw a busy few months of business at Stamford Bridge but found himself out of a job after being sacked earlier this week.

What happened with Gilmour?

Last season saw the Scotland international sent out on loan to Norwich City for the duration of the campaign after the Canaries were promoted back to the Premier League.

However, it was not a successful spell for Gilmour. He made 28 appearances for the East Anglian side but frequently found himself on the bench as they were relegated back to the Championship.

It became clear that he was unlikely to break into the Blues’ starting XI any time soon, with Mateo Kovacic, Jorginho, N’Golo Kante, Ruben Loftus-Cheek and Conor Gallagher all likely ahead of him in the pecking order.

When he was sold to Brighton for £9 million on deadline day, it was not a big surprise to many.

However, when Gilmour made the move to the south coast, he was all set to play under Graham Potter, one of the country’s most highly-rated managers.

But after Tuchel’s surprise sacking, Chelsea moved to appoint the 47-year-old as their new leading man at Stamford Bridge.

What has Phillips said on the situation?

Phillips understands that the decision to sell Gilmour in the summer was made by Boehly and the Chelsea board, rather than Tuchel himself.

He adds that they were advised by specialists who told them that the 21-year-old would likely not progress to the level they had previously wanted.

Phillips told GIVEMESPORT: “[Selling] Billy Gilmour was actually a Chelsea board decision. I've had that on good authority. Although Tuchel didn't really rate him, it was the board's decision to sell him because they'd been advised by specialists or tacticians or scouts that they didn't think that Gilmour was going to be the player that they would expect him to be. So, they allowed him to go to Brighton and I think for Gilmour, because he didn't want to go on loan anywhere, this was all he wanted to do.”

Was this the right decision?

Given the depth available to the Blues in midfield, it was likely the correct call.

Gilmour’s loan to Norwich seemed like a pivotal moment in his career but it only served to hamper his progress as the lacklustre Canaries suffered relegation.

At 21, he still has plenty of time to develop into a top player, however. Perhaps doing that at a well-run club like Brighton and away from the limelight in west London could be just what is needed.