BREAKING: Lucas Paqueta granted permission to open talks with Manchester City transfer
Latest Manchester City transfer news and rumours with updates on Lucas Paqueta and Bernardo Silva looked at through a fresh perspective
Kevin De Bruyne of Manchester City and Lucas Paqueta of West Ham United talk during the Premier League match between Manchester City and West Ham United at Etihad Stadium on May 19, 2024 in Manchester, England.
Lucas Paqueta looks to have been handed a final Manchester City transfer answer following a shock announcement
Manchester City will be aiming for another successful summer transfer window as Pep Guardiola eyes Premier League title number five in as many years.
Mateo Kovacic and Jeremy Doku both played key roles after joining Man City ahead of the 2023/24 season and Guardiola will likely be looking for similar signings to also make an impact. West Ham star Lucas Paqueta could be one of those as he still has admirers within Etihad Stadium but a seismic update on his immediate future could put City off for good.
Keeping the core of his squad together will also be of vast importance, however Ederson could harm that with the possibility that he departs this summer. Kyle Walker and Bernardo Silva are two other key cogs in Guardiola’s winning machine with it entirely plausible the duo seek new challenges.
Walker was on the verge of leaving last summer and now reports have suggested Silva may also be on the move. With that in mind, MEN Sport has rounded up the latest Man City transfer news with a fresh perspective offered on two big talking points.
Paqueta charged by FA
On Thursday, the FA announced Paqueta had been charged with breaching betting rules with fears his West Ham career may be over. The likes of Ivan Toney and Sandro Tonali have already faced significant punishment and with that precedent set, it is likely Paqueta is given the same treatment.
Part of the FA statement read: “The player has been charged with four breaches of FA Rule E5.1 in relation to his conduct in the club’s Premier League fixtures against Leicester City on 12 November 2022; Aston Villa on 12 March 2023; Leeds United on 21 May 2023; and AFC Bournemouth on 12 August 2023.”
MEN says: “With concerns his West Ham tenure may be done, it is highly unlikely Paqueta remains as a Man City transfer target. A considerable ban is the likely outcome following this update with it obvious the reigning champions will want to steer clear.
“Last summer, amid the emergence of potential betting breaches, City opted to sign Matheus Nunes from Wolves instead but his first season in Manchester has not gone to plan. Despite Kovacic showing signs of improvement, Guardiola is still yet to replace Ilkay Gundogan with it likely one of his objectives for the summer now that a move for Paqueta is firmly off the table.”
Bernardo Silva £50m transfer claim
Despite his versatility and paramount importance to Guardiola, Bernardo Silva will be available in this summer’s transfer window at £50million, according to Football Insider.
The Portugal international has been previously linked to an exit but he has continued to remind Man City of just how good and reliable he is. City will of course need to begin thinking about a rebuild with several star players not getting any younger but for Silva that looks unlikely to happen now.
MEN says: “Man City selling Silva seems almost unfathomable. Such is the depth of his squad, Guardiola can afford to rotate the former Monaco man but City always appear better with him in the team either out wide or centrally.
“The 29-year-old is vital to Guardiola, keeping his team balanced when deploying both Kevin De Bruyne and Phil Foden in the same starting XI. Alongside his ability on the ball, it is when City aren’t in possession he has become an extremely valuable member of the squad with Rodri at times given license to get forward all because of his versatility.
“Eventually parting ways with Silva is a possibility but City can absolutely demand more than £50million, despite the fact his current contract expires in 2026.”
Leave a Reply