Although Scott Sinclair must have expected his first-team opportunities to be somewhat limited when he joined Manchester City last summer, he surely can’t have imagined he would have started only two league games by this point.
That is the reality of the 23-year-old’s situation though, and as such, he appears ready to consider his future this summer, with the ultimate aim of getting more game-time.
And the former Swansea man will not be short of options if he does decide to make a summer switch for the second year in succession.
Aston Villa are currently leading the chase for the player, who starred in Team GB’s Olympic campaign in 2012, but their chances of landing him are fully dependant on them maintaining their Premier League status this term.
If he did make the move to Villa Park, Sinclair would provide competition for the likes of Andi Weimann and Gabby Agbonlahor, who would both prefer to be utilised in more central attacking roles.
And with the departures of Weimann and Christian Benteke mooted, Sinclair’s ability to play on either flank, or up front, could prove essential for the Villains.
Everton are also in the hunt for the Englishman’s signature though, and would almost fully reimburse City the £6.2m they paid Swansea for Sinclair’s services only last summer.
The uncertain future of David Moyes would seem to negate the Toffees’ chances of doing business however, and should Villa remain in the top flight, they would be strong favourites to capture the ex-Chelsea trainee.
Former club Swansea could feasibly welcome him back meanwhile, though Sinclair’s increased wage demands since leaving Wales would likely prove a stumbling block.
Indeed, the winger more than quadrupled his £10,000-per-week Jacks salary when becoming an Etihad player this season, and is unlikely to settle for much less than a similar pay packet.
The maintenance of Villa’s Premier League status would ensure that they could afford to offer him it, and Paul Lambert looks willing to do so in order to add some much-needed flair to his ranks.
All Odds and Markets are correct as of the date of publishing.