  Several different measures for digraph width have appeared in the last few
years. However, none of them shares all the "nice" properties of treewidth:
First, being \emph{algorithmically useful} i.e. admitting polynomial-time
algorithms for all $\MS1$-definable problems on digraphs of bounded width. And,
second, having nice \emph{structural properties} i.e. being monotone under
taking subdigraphs and some form of arc contractions. As for the former,
(undirected) $\MS1$ seems to be the least common denominator of all reasonably
expressive logical languages on digraphs that can speak about the edge/arc
relation on the vertex set.The latter property is a necessary condition for a
width measure to be characterizable by some version of the cops-and-robber game
characterizing the ordinary treewidth. Our main result is that \emph{any
reasonable} algorithmically useful and structurally nice digraph measure cannot
be substantially different from the treewidth of the underlying undirected
graph. Moreover, we introduce \emph{directed topological minors} and argue that
they are the weakest useful notion of minors for digraphs.
