Manchester United have distanced themselves from reports in Holland that Louis van Gaal has agreed a three-year deal to become their new manager.
The Dutchman is the favourite to replace the sacked David Moyes at the end of the season, with prominent newspaper De Telegraaf claiming on Saturday morning that the 62-year-old agreed a deal on Friday.
The report said that Van Gaal met United chief executive Ed Woodward and a member of the Glazer family, the club's owners, at his private villa in the Algarve.
It added that the former Barcelona and Bayern Munich coach, who will lead Holland at this summer's World Cup, would be free to choose his own backroom staff, claiming he would likely take Patrick Kluivert as his number two.
But United, who have put Ryan Giggs in charge until the end of the season, denied the reports, with a spokesman saying: "There is nothing to report. We have not signed a new manager. When we have something to report, we will announce it."
Any move for Van Gaal would now appear to be a contradiction of the wishes of former manager Sir Alex Ferguson.
The Scot, whose retirement teed up the appointment of Moyes - a decision he was a driving force behind - on Friday appeared to put his weight behind Giggs getting the job on a full-time basis.
"I think that he [Giggs] is the one man they should go to really,'' Ferguson said at a charity dinner.
"He's got 20-odd years of experience at Manchester United. I signed him as a kid at 13 years of age.
"He's gone through the gamut of emotions at the club - he's experienced all the highs and lows."
Giggs has immediately tried to evoke memories of former eras at Old Trafford, by installing fellow members of the 'Class of 92' - Nicky Butt, Phil Neville and Paul Scholes - on his staff.
"He knows exactly what's needed to be a Manchester United player and I was so pleased he brought Paul Scholes back in, and Nicky Butt of course - two great professionals," Ferguson added.
"They understand the club, they are hard workers, they are straight as a die. So you have got the right combinations there, there's no doubt about that."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article