Most improved player this season?

I don't think Wiseman has improved I just think peoples perception has. He has always been a good composed player. He did make a balls up in the Rochdale game

 

The fact that we cannot decide who it is out of about 7 options says everything for this group of players since Christmas.

Wiseman
Kennedy
Golbourne
Dawson
Etuhu
RNL
Dagnall

Etuhu for me - Plenty would have been happy to see him on his way in January - Now he is perhaps the most vital cog in midfield. With him Perkins and Dawson ready for Saturday we have a great chance.

 

Wiseman's performance against Peterborough at home was amongst the worst I've witnessed in donkeys years. I'm as pleased as anyone that he appears to have turned things around but I know what I saw.

 

Definitely.

But he's been so good since the Man City game that it's easier to forgive. It's much harder to contain your anger/disappointment when a player is making those kind of mistakes almost all the time.

I still think Keith's stubborn "I'm right.." attitude hurt Wisey more than a few numpties booing him once, or a handful of nobbish tweets.

 

Etuhu for me. From a ***** winger/attacker to a quality defensive midfielder. Some transformation for the lad. We really miss him when he's not playing.

 

Dawson for me anall. Didn`t think Crainie would make a central defender and whilst both him an Wisey have played very well together I`m still unsure whether both together is the answer.

Etuhu ,as well, same as everyone else, CM is his bag.

Mellis since coming back into the team, he has added a defensive/retrieve the ball side to his game which is nice to see.

 

Flicker's done a great job with Wiseman since taking over, he took him out of the team when his confidence was at an all time low & brought him back bit by bit starting the away game at Hull in the cup when the pressure was off.

He was inconsistent last season, he had good games but it's also fair to say he got caught out of position fairly often & plenty of avoidable goals came from it.

At right back he's been very good this season apart from the home game against Blackburn.

The thing with Hill / Wiseman was that Hill kept playing him at centre back against physical sides. I think we all understood that Wiseman could do a job there against footballing teams using his pace but playing him there against the likes of Peterborough was ridiculous at wasn't helping Wiseman at all. I think Whitey's spot on with his comment on Hill wanting to prove who's boss rather than picking his best 11 to suit each game.

Glad to see him doing well & full of confidence & hope it continues.

 

So, just to summarise, with McNulty injured, Cranie not yet signed and Hassell even shorter than Wiseman, Keith Hill was picking Wiseman in the centre of defense just to prove who was in charge. Some of these conspiracy theories are non-sense. Some do not even work when the facts are changed to suit some cockeyed notion at the time. The notion that Keith Hill was obstinate and made his decisions just to frustrate the fansis just bonkers. Roll on the day when brain surgery is made a spectator sport. I can not wait for the amateurs to tell the professional what he is doing wrong in that game too.

 

I can't help but think that had he stayed fit, we'd already be safe by now.

 

Wiseman, Always told you he'd come good ;-)

 

I'm not talking about the first couple of weeks of the season. I'm talking about in October / November when it was clear Wiseman was struggling at centre back against sides that were physical. By that time we had plenty of options at cente back & yet he still persisted with it to try & prove a point.

 

For me

It'd be Kelvin Etuhu. He's gone from being an unimpressive squad player to a midfield powerhouse and an integral part of the team. Scott Wiseman was on a downward spiral with regards to performances and self confidence during 2012 and appeared to be totally broken during the Blackburn Rovers game in December. For him to go from that position to the current one of a highly efficient & stylish defender is remarkable. The likes of Flitcroft, Mellon & Scott have played a large part with these transformations. However, the greatest credit must go to Kelvin & Scott. They have both dug deep, shown tremendous character, worked extremely hard at both their game and application and are now reaping the benefits of their work. For anyone to dismiss this transformation as being either not needed, or not even having taken place does a great disservice to both players and a failure to appreciate the remarkable improvement of their performances.

 

Good points there, mate

Well argued.

 

They aren't conspiracy theories when you're in possession of knowledgable facts.

 

Re: For me

I do not disagree that the change in Etuhu has been nothing short of miraculous. However, I maintain my position that Wiseman was never as bad as most posters on here were pointing out. Then again my position on Bobby Hassell is that he has had a glorious past, but has an uncertain future. Many opinions of the performances of Wiseman were coloured by a loyalty to Hassell which is praiseworthy, but should not be allowed to get in the way of good judgement. It is that same absence of good judgement in many cases that was against the appointment of Flitcroft because he was deemed part of the problem. It is that herd mentality, that is encouraged by the BBS. Those who shout loudest and those who shout most often are deemed to be correct unless their opinions are challenged. I do not belong to any herd and neither would I be part of a lynch mob. I am proud to say that I have not advocated sacking a manager since Spackman left. My views are independent and will remain so. As for not crediting Wiseman with improvement under the new manager, the systematic undermining of the players confidence that happened across the internet very nearly turned a good BFC player into a good player at another club. Some posters need to reflect upon their job as supporters before they reflect upon the ability of managers or players.

 

Unless you are willing to share your facts, and are willing share your source for said facts, and are willing to show a more believable motive, then I will continue to assert that all the conspiracy theories are just bonkers.

 

I'm not for a second saying I don't agree with you but have you been adding 'argument sugar' to your cornflakes recently?