The current agreement means he will go back if nothing else changes and the clause is triggered. However the player may tell his agent that he wants to stay which will get the clubs involved on how they want that to work out. Do we just pay Man City the market value minus what we paid? But if he wants to go back it's a done deal. We'll have got two years out of him and Man City get a better player than the one that left.
That's my point really. If he's happy here and he was concerned that he would only be a bit part player there, it's not as open and shut as is being made out.
I would't be surprised if they went for Jorginho tbh.
Quick Poll: In January, would you pay £20m to remove the clause if it meant we could not sign anyone else? Your answer must begin with YES to NO.I’m a YES.
Then he would still sign for them, as he's already agreed to. Unless, as others have said we pay to override the current contract and he wants us to do that.It's annoying, but I fully expect him to go back there and be their first-choice defensive midfielder next season.
Is it actually a fact that there is a clause where Man City can buy him back for a fixed amount if they want him. Everybody is saying that but could it be that they have first refusal at the set amount if Villa are looking to sell him. The Man City manager was quoted as saying they have an option to bring him back but not the condition.