Guillem Balague does not believe David de Gea would speak out about Louis van Gaal in a bid to force a transfer away from Manchester United. It was claimed in several newspapers on Tuesday that the Spanish goalkeeper would be prepared to leave Old Trafford if Van Gaal was kept on as manager.One report stated that due to a deteriorating relationship with the manager, De Gea will delay a decision over whether to sign a contract extension which would tie him to United until 2021. But Sky Sports Spanish football expert Balague does not believe De Gea would adopt such a position, and feels he proved his loyalty in that regard when he continued to perform to a high standard despite the collapse of his move to Real Madrid last summer. Will David de Gea and Keylor Navas end up swapping places at Manchester United and Real Madrid this summer? It sounds so un-De Gea like, for a player to put a manager in that kind of position, he said.And especially when now that we are all hearing that the club want Van Gaal to stay for now.Of course it would be a way to force his [De Geas] way out for sure. But De Gea would not do that. David de Geas proposed transfer to Real Madrid collapsed last summer When he has been in that position, when he has been asked to rebel against Manchester United, every time he has said no. When he didnt manage to go to Madrid, he put his head down, didnt complain, started working and in a few weeks became the No 1 again.Balague does, however, believe Real Madrid are considering their options and could make an offer for De Gea in the summer. David de Gea tells Sky Sports Patrick Davison he is happy at Manchester United and wants to become a club hero The plan is Real Madrid are thinking about paying the money for De Gea - they are thinking about that.If they do that, they will want to sell Keylor Navas. Of course, Manchester United will then need a goalkeeper.There are still a lot of question marks, but I think that deal still may happen. I think De Gea will be considering going to Madrid.I feel Real let De Gea down in the summer. I think they have an obligation to go back and they are thinking about it. Also See: United havent made Zlatan offer Rashford can make final squad Rooney wants midfield role United have no deal with Mourinho Rudy Gobert Jersey . -- The Phoenix Coyotes have won three in a row for the first time in 4 1/2 months, and theyve done it just in time for the stretch run to the playoffs. Tony Bradley Jazz Jersey . The Spanish champions decision not to sign a defender during the January transfer window may have backfired after Valencia took advantage of a lethargic, uninspired effort by its hosts at the Camp Nou, where former Spain coach Luis Aragones -- who previously coached the Catalan side -- was honoured after his death on Saturday. http://www.jazzauthentic.com/kids-donovan-mitchell-jazz-jersey/ . - Henrik Samuelsson and Curtis Lazar each had two goals and two assists as the Edmonton Oil Kings secured top spot in the Eastern Conference by defeating the host Red Deer Rebels 7-4 on Saturday in Western Hockey League action. John Stockton Jersey .While Rosberg is coming off a strong victory at the Brazilian Grand Prix, Hamilton is dwelling on a mistake that ended his streak of five consecutive wins and kept him from increasing his advantage. Rudy Gobert Jazz Jersey .C. -- Marcus Paige and his North Carolina teammates have endured so many wild swings -- big wins, surprising losses, NCAA drama -- that no one can blame their Hall of Fame coach for wondering whats next.On this weeks TSNFC podcast we spent a long time discussing the handball decision that effectively ended Vancouver Whitecaps season. Much has been said and written about whether or not World Cup referee Mark Geiger made the right call to penalize Kendall Waston in last weeks playoff match at Dallas, with many differing opinions on the matter. There doesnt seem to be a consensus, although Geigers boss - referees chief Peter Walton - said it was the correct decision and a standard call. As a veteran Premier League referee who now runs the Professional Referees Organization in North America, Waltons opinion should be respected, but the controversy surrounding the decision - and many other handball decisions we see all over the world each week - could easily be avoided if there were a change to the law. In my view, there are two things wrong with the current law. Firstly, the punishment doesnt fairly reflect the size of the crime. Secondly, there is too much room for interpretation of the referee which makes consistency of decisions almost impossible. Here are the main points of the current FIFA Law: Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with his hand or arm. The referee must take the following into consideration: ? the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) ? the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) ? the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement Deliberate - done consciously and intentionally I dont think Kendall Waston made a conscious and intentional decision to handle the ball inside the penalty area in the last 10 minutes of a playoff match. In my mind it was a momentary lapse in concentration from the towering defender rather than a deliberate act. In relation to this law, it seems deliberate can also mean a player didnt react quickly enough to move his hand/arm out of the way of the ball. But the fact the law allows such ambiguity means officials are in the spotlight more than necessary whether or not they get the decision right. There must be a bettter way.dddddddddddd Although video replays will certainly assist officials decision making in other areas, in the instance of Waston it wouldnt have made much difference because even with review, the decision would have been made depending on the officials interpretation of the law. One suggestion I have seen is to award a penalty anytime the ball hits a hand or arm inside the area whether it is intentional or not. A clear rule - it doesnt matter how it happens, if the ball strikes the hand, it is a penalty. Theres very little room for argument and interpretation there, but I think it would lead to far too many penalties and also an excessive number of game changing moments. Again, the punishment wouldnt match the offence. New Law So how about this. In order to provide clarity, I would be in favour of a rule change along the following lines: Anytime a player makes contact with the ball inside the penalty area with his hand or arm, an indirect free kick will be given. There is no room for interpretation - if it hits the arm or hand whether deliberate or not, it is an indirect free kick. There is one exception. If a player handles the ball to prevent a goal or an obvious goal scoring opportunity, a penalty is given. With this rule applied, Kendall Wastons handball would have been penalized with an indirect free kick, still giving the opposing team the benefit of a set piece close to goal but eliminating the need for a referee to award a penalty for an incident that was not going to end in a goal. For me, that far better reflects the size of the infringement and also would remove much of the debate surrounding penalty kicks awarded for handball. Im not na?ve enough to expect that changing the law would eliminate all problems. Im sure in some instances there would still be controversy and debate surrounding what is or isnt an obvious goal scoring opportunity. But I believe it would drastically decrease the amount of times a game is decided by a referees decision and therefore lead to more post-game talk about players instead of officiating – and that can only be a good thing. ' ' '