Josh Martin

[Jonathan]

I despair at the fact we rule this kind of thing out because he’d cost a fee. This is a player we could make money on. Any risk is minimised by the fa t we already know him and know what he can do, because he played here on loan.

It's the easiest thing to say when you're not holding the pursestrings and you're not aware of the bigger picture.

We may already have signed a player or two with more attacking and goalscoring potential than Martin, in Miller and Molyneux, for free.

Who knows who else may be on the radar.

We have no clue what the fee is or what his wage demands would be, or whether he'd be prepared to consider dropping to League Two. We already know there are other clubs paying an interest.

Would you really want to make a spacial case for Martin? Don't we all agree we have other priorities first?

How many special cases are you going to present to the board??

We can only trust that GM and Copps have already considered all of those factors and to suggest otherwise is shortsighted really.

Im well aware that it’s easy to say this and that when you’re not holding the purse strings. Contrary to what you many be implying, it is possible to be both eternally grateful to (and supportive of) the owners, but frustrated at the insinuation we’d rule out bringing a top player back because he’d cost a fee. I’m allowed an opinion, and my opinion is that it appears short sighted. That doesn’t make me an ungrateful ****, because I’m not!

Bit why do you assume it's the owners? I'm sure GM and Copps will have weighed everything up and perhaps, they don't intend making that special case for Martin.

They have to be really pragmatic about these things. If we're talking about a left sided player who can contribute goals, we already have Tommy Rowe. Perhaps, in terms of back up, it's a position they're already earmarked for a loan and would rather prioritise other positions?

I’m not arguing as it’ll just go on and on until I agree that not bringing Josh Martin back is a fantastic idea and all at the club should be applauded for it. And any supporter that wants to see him back here is not worthy of the title.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

I despair at the fact we rule this kind of thing out because he’d cost a fee. This is a player we could make money on. Any risk is minimised by the fa t we already know him and know what he can do, because he played here on loan.

It's the easiest thing to say when you're not holding the pursestrings and you're not aware of the bigger picture.

We may already have signed a player or two with more attacking and goalscoring potential than Martin, in Miller and Molyneux, for free.

Who knows who else may be on the radar.

We have no clue what the fee is or what his wage demands would be, or whether he'd be prepared to consider dropping to League Two. We already know there are other clubs paying an interest.

Would you really want to make a spacial case for Martin? Don't we all agree we have other priorities first?

How many special cases are you going to present to the board??

We can only trust that GM and Copps have already considered all of those factors and to suggest otherwise is shortsighted really.

Im well aware that it’s easy to say this and that when you’re not holding the purse strings. Contrary to what you many be implying, it is possible to be both eternally grateful to (and supportive of) the owners, but frustrated at the insinuation we’d rule out bringing a top player back because he’d cost a fee. I’m allowed an opinion, and my opinion is that it appears short sighted. That doesn’t make me an ungrateful ****, because I’m not!

Bit why do you assume it's the owners? I'm sure GM and Copps will have weighed everything up and perhaps, they don't intend making that special case for Martin.

They have to be really pragmatic about these things. If we're talking about a left sided player who can contribute goals, we already have Tommy Rowe. Perhaps, in terms of back up, it's a position they're already earmarked for a loan and would rather prioritise other positions?

I’m not arguing as it’ll just go on and on until I agree that not bringing Josh Martin back is a fantastic idea and all at the club should be applauded for it. And any supporter that wants to see him back here is not worthy of the title.

It's not arguing. It's debate and putting forward different perspectives.

I like Josh Martin and his potential but If I'm in GMs shoes, I could understand why he might not be a priority that warrants paying a fee, even if he would consider coming here.

[steve@dcfd]

DBR GMC says there is a fee involved so we will park our interest. Now if he not sold then we might go back for a loan. That statement doesn’t tell me that we have someone else we are not being proactive we will wait and see reactive.

[ncRover]

The attention and scrutiny should be on why we still don’t have a first choice left back

[Daniel_Smith]

Have we paid any transfer fees for any player this window? I know funds are tight, but Josh seems like the type of player we should be dipping our hand in our pocket for - assuming the transfer fee isn't ridiculous of course.

[mushRTID]

I thought the argument for loans was described as “try before you buy”. Have I imagined that?

If it was, have we now dropped that?

[anton123]

It needs to be renamed as try before they give us him for free

[sedwardsdrfc]

Players we though worth a reasonable fee in my memory were Whiteman, Mills, Sharp maybe a couple of others. But it shows the loan to try then pay a reasonable fee gets you both a great player who enhances performance and then has resale value. We made a profit on all the above.

It'll be much rarer for us to sign a Marquis type who is let go and then we sell for 1m+

For what it's worth if we want him i'd be cheeky offer them 50k up front then a decent resale %. Norwich are a decent club so would probably rather go with that than have a young player wasting away in the reserves

[steve@dcfd]

The attention and scrutiny should be on why we still don’t have a first choice left back

Yet we are trialing a player released by Sunderland that as not played an EFL league game and majority of time when played at U 23 and any cup game played left wing back. He was a winger when in youth football in Scotland. So is he our priority???

[RoversAlias]

What people are perhaps forgetting in the Martin stakes is that we got relegated.

He performed well in a poor side at a higher level than we are at now. There will be League One teams willing to offer a six-figure fee for him if he's available for transfer, like it or not we will not likely have a budget which stretches to spending £100-250k on a single player.

If he is instead loaned out, Norwich have no reason to loan him to League Two. He has shown he can perform at a higher level and if they want to see one more season of his development before letting him go, it makes sense to send him to a club in League One for the full campaign.

We signed Whiteman after a loan as a top half League One side. Mills and Sharp as an upwardly mobile Championship team. Speculating to accumulate is a sound strategy in that sense but it is much harder to do when you drop to the bottom tier.

[Alan Southstand]

IF we have other loans already lined up, then I wonder if any of them are match ready? We now know Martin is, because we got him up to speed! To simply dismiss this opportunity is somewhat foolhardy, when you think in terms of the possible future returns from a player, with further development, who could, quite possibly, make us a handsome profit which could be re-invested into the playing budget.

According to many on here, we were waiting until after the end of June and then we’d see movement. Alas, it seems we have a constipated transfer policy.

[Plumbster]

If we are going to spend a fee on anyone I would be prioritising the defence- I share others concerns that we are currently nowhere near good enough in that department and it will prevent us having a successful season

[ncRover]

The attention and scrutiny should be on why we still don’t have a first choice left back

Yet we are trialing a player released by Sunderland that as not played an EFL league game and majority of time when played at U 23 and any cup game played left wing back. He was a winger when in youth football in Scotland. So is he our priority???

Especially in the wake of the Anderson uncertainty we need experience in actual defending. This kid could be a good prospect, who knows? But it would be a huge gamble and unlikely to come off if he was our only option.

[Dutch Uncle]

What people are perhaps forgetting in the Martin stakes is that we got relegated.

He performed well in a poor side at a higher level than we are at now. There will be League One teams willing to offer a six-figure fee for him if he's available for transfer, like it or not we will not likely have a budget which stretches to spending £100-250k on a single player.

If he is instead loaned out, Norwich have no reason to loan him to League Two. He has shown he can perform at a higher level and if they want to see one more season of his development before letting him go, it makes sense to send him to a club in League One for the full campaign.

We signed Whiteman after a loan as a top half League One side. Mills and Sharp as an upwardly mobile Championship team. Speculating to accumulate is a sound strategy in that sense but it is much harder to do when you drop to the bottom tier.

Given Norwich will have parachute payments, if they are bothered to ask a fee I would be surprised if it would be less than say 500k. Difficult to know or be critical imho.

That could be spent on 4 or 5 other players at our level, and I for one am worried about numbers in our squad with our recent record on injuries.

[graingrover]

I have a different concern .Copps is clearly proud of being Sporting Director of a club that is self sustainable ( Club Doncaster). That being so is he likely to step outside that very paradigm to ask the Board to invest further money for transfer fees.If not then I would  not expect any proactive investment suggestions from DB .

[GazLaz]

I have a different concern .Copps is clearly proud of being Sporting Director of a club that is self sustainable ( Club Doncaster). That being so is he likely to step outside that very paradigm to ask the Board to invest further money for transfer fees.If not then I would  not expect any proactive investment suggestions from DB .

Are you implying that’s why Copps was given the job by Blunt?

[DonnyOsmond]

I despair at the fact we rule this kind of thing out because he’d cost a fee. This is a player we could make money on. Any risk is minimised by the fa t we already know him and know what he can do, because he played here on loan.

It's the easiest thing to say when you're not holding the pursestrings and you're not aware of the bigger picture.

We may already have signed a player or two with more attacking and goalscoring potential than Martin, in Miller and Molyneux, for free.

Who knows who else may be on the radar.

We have no clue what the fee is or what his wage demands would be, or whether he'd be prepared to consider dropping to League Two. We already know there are other clubs paying an interest.

Would you really want to make a spacial case for Martin? Don't we all agree we have other priorities first?

How many special cases are you going to present to the board??

We can only trust that GM and Copps have already considered all of those factors and to suggest otherwise is shortsighted really.

Them two will have more goalscoring potential, but he's a creative player first and foremost, the #1 thing we lacked last season was creativity and if we go into next season without creativity then we'll not be anywhere near top 3 and will very unlikely get top 7. Martin isn't a striker and will easily fit into a team with both Molyneux and Miller, and even Taylor if you want to play a 4-2-3-1 with Molyneux as the second striker.

Martin probably has potential to play in the Championship if he doesn't have any major injuries.

[Jonathan]

I don’t know why there’s a debate about whether GM would like to sign Martin, he’s made it clear that he would and that paying a fee is the stumbling block.

Now I take the point that if it’s £500k that’s too much for us to shell out, but I very much doubt it’s anywhere near that.

[DonnyOsmond]

I don’t know why there’s a debate about whether GM would like to sign Martin, he’s made it clear that he would and that paying a fee is the stumbling block.

Now I take the point that if it’s £500k that’s too much for us to shell out, but I very much doubt it’s anywhere near that.

Yeah, if it's under £250K with a sell-on then we should consider it.

[graingrover]

I was not implying anything about DB but about Copps .It may be that he has had the financial parameters clearly set out for him but most important is that he is proud that’s the club can break even on attendances supplemented by some considerable revenue generated by Club Doncaster .
I believe that it is a long time since the owners paid a transfer fee but for many years they have stepped in to clear losses and or debt .
In future the footballing management’s only way of increasing their budget is by building a successful team that in turn improves attendances .

[Chris Black come back]

Unpopular opinion. Didn’t actually produce that much, albeit in a dire team. If we are talking 100k for instance we can probably put that to better use elsewhere. We’ve got in wide positions Taylor, Agard, Molyneux, Rowe and whoever we bring in on loan. Do we really need another one?

[roversdude]

I’m with CBCB on this, yes he has potential but spent more time running across the pitch than attacking (albeit in a dire team)

[Jonathan]

Martin has a natural ability to create time on the ball, and has huge potential to get goals and assists in the right set up. Of course he’s not the finished article - that’s the whole point and this is a player we can develop having already assessed his fit within the club. Our own opinions are somewhat immaterial, the fact is the manager likes him and listening to Copps on the commentary so does he.

If the fee is reasonable (and I suspect it ought to be) then this comes down to how much the club want to push for it. Having already had him in the building, we know what we’re getting. Do we want to be the beneficiary from his development? Or have we done our bit and we’ll stand aside and let someone else profit from that. 

[Upton Rover]

Got to spend simple as that

[Move DRFC]

Martin’s ball carrying ability is top draw. Just by that he’d create an extra 2/3 chances a game just by being able to carry the ball so well up the pitch.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Unpopular opinion. Didn’t actually produce that much, albeit in a dire team. If we are talking 100k for instance we can probably put that to better use elsewhere. We’ve got in wide positions Taylor, Agard, Molyneux, Rowe and whoever we bring in on loan. Do we really need another one?

Exactly. This is the point I'm also making. Perhaps GM and Copps are capable of weighing things up for themselves and for the moment paying a fee for Josh Martin is not a priority when we have his position covered but are yet to fill others.

Yes, he's a good player and has good potential but I would not be considering this before I've got my other positions sorted.

Perhaps those who assume it's the board who are preventing this, rather than any other factors, should put the question to GM/Copps/GB at the Supporters Club AGM.

[Jonathan]

Perhaps perhaps is the new buzz word.

[Alan Southstand]

Perhaps we should have had a left back signed already!

[TheFunk]

Personally I'm more concerned that we look like we will be starting the season without any fit full backs. Hopefully in the attacking areas we've someone better and cheaper than Martin lined up.

[roversdude]

Even Man Utd signed a left back