Real reportedly say no to David de Gea transfer appeal

United failed to send the completed documentation before the Spanish transfer deadline at midnight on Monday night


Sports Desk/afp September 01, 2015
PHOTO: AFP

MADRID: Spanish giants, Real Madrid, have reportedly opted out to appeal for Spanish international goalkeeper David de Gea's transfer to English Club Manchester United.

According to Sky Sports, de Gea will stay at Old Trafford until at least January.

Earlier, de Gea's proposed move to Madrid was halted on Monday night as the documentation needed to formalise the transfer from United wasn't completed in time according to reports.

Madrid seemed set to conclude the long-running transfer saga with a deal that would see the Spanish giants pay up to 25 million euros ($28 million, £18.2 million) and send Costa Rican international 'keeper Keylor Navas to United as part of the deal.

However, Spanish media reported that United failed to send the completed documentation before the Spanish transfer deadline at midnight on Monday night.

De Gea hadn't featured in any of United's six games so far this season with manager Louis van Gaal claiming the 24-year-old wasn't focused at the English giants due to Madrid's interest.

The 10-time European champions were in the market for a goalkeeper after Spain captain Iker Casillas ended his 25-year association with the club by moving to Porto in July.

De Gea joined United from Real's city rivals Atletico Madrid in 2011 and despite a shaky start went on to shine, winning the club's fans' and players' player of the year awards for the past two seasons.

However, he refused to sign a new deal with United due to his desire to return back to Spain with Real.

A standoff between the two clubs ensued with United also expressing their interest in Real captain Sergio Ramos over the summer before he ended speculation over his future by signing a new five-year deal with Los Blancos.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ