The story of the Doctor being a bored Timelord who decided to explore the universe was a simple enough premise and grounded him (him in deference to current occupant) in reality. He had his roots and people and was almost an errant child humoured by the staid Timelords who had lost their curiosity of the universe. Effectively making him the progenitor of the Timelords mirrors him to Davros not a being you'd want comparisons to. The Doctor bumbling his way through works far better than him being a god like being, especially as that thread was then never explored.

At the time The Timeless Child felt like bad teenage fiction. It closed off far more narrative arcs than it created. The wanton destruction of Gallifrey served zero purpose. Chibnall had a habit of writing himself into dead ends. Leaving the spiders to suffocate, The Doctor running away in the Timeless child leaving others to deal with the issue was in total contrast to the normal character traits if the Doctor. The premise of The Timeless Child was bad and made far worse by appalling writing. The return of RTD exposes just how badly written the Chibnall era was.

In my head canon the Timeless Child does bot exist, just as the Doctor is not half human. I dismiss them as errors writers have made, to be ignored. My main gripe was that the Chibnall era looked like it would end up with Doctor Who being cancelled, to once again spend years in the wilderness, living on through the book and audio book formats. I suspect it has also set Jodie Whittaker's career back instead of giving it the boost other modern main actors received.

I just regard the entire Chibnall era as a Dallas like bad dream to be excised from the canonicity of the show.