The only place to be

Yes he is. He's only been pushed on because Moyes needed his presence further forward. Again, I think he would be a massive upgrade over Mikel. Part of the reason we have Ramires alongside Mikel is to cover up for a lot of his failings. With someone like Fellaini in there, we could conceivably drop someone like Oscar back into that playmaker role and not be exposed quite so much.

Honestly I don't think any of the defenders get enough protection from the midfield. But my view of Luiz is that he simply doesn't enjoy defending like Terry or Ivanovic. I always get the impression that the highlight of Terry's matches are those near-post clearances - for Luiz it's when he gets a chance to run out of defence or gets a free-kick opportunity. He also lacks the concentration I think top-class defenders need. At Barcelona, in La Liga he would be brilliant but in the Premier League I think he just gets caught out too often.

I love how when people criticise Benitez, zonal marking comes up. Quick everyone - check under your bed for zonal marking!!! I'm not a fan of Benitez, but he's well-respected throughout the game and in 2009 his Liverpool team won came second in the league with 86 points. The season after we won the league with the same amount. Pretty much exactly this.

Luiz is a better passer and faster. Ivanovic is better at all that messy 'defending' stuff. In my opinion, Luiz isn't a natural defender. He doesn't have those defender's instincts that someone like Terry does.

Our best CB currently is Branislav Ivanovic.

In my opinion, that's not why we'd sign Fellaini. He'd be a replacement for Mikel, to be that defensive stopper who then starts moves off and also drops into the back two. He'd essentially be our Busquets. I think Chalobah could probably play in either position. He's probably a bit young to play that Mikel role at the moment, but he could probably spend next season on the bench getting game time in either position.

In what way?

I can, and I have admitted mistakes he has made. I think you and I just view him differently. You think we 'sold our soul for Russia roubles' and I don't.

1. He's won a couple of titles (with Valencia in a league that either Barcelona and Real Madrid have won in 23 of the last 27 seasons!) and been named the best manager in Europe twice. Is that really 'disappointing'? 2. In Roman's mind he did have someone better lined up. Roman doesn't just buy on a whim though. Again, that's more media bollocks. He may do now and then, but if you look at the club's buys in recent years they've been geared towards buying young talented players who we can either develop internally or send out on loan. Players like Torres and Shevchenko are the exception rather than the rule now. It's almost as if you have some kind of agenda against our owner.

He'd be okay in La Liga, but if I'm being honest I'd be happier playing against him than having him in our team.

1. It's easy to say that his Champions League win involved a bit of luck, but so did Robbie's if we're being fair. Let's not just brush over his achievements and pretend like he isn't a well-regarded manager. Yes his time at Inter was disappointing, but that tends to happen when Mourinho leaves clubs. It will probably happen at Real too. 2. Clearly Roman never fancied Robbie but felt compelled to hire him after Munich. But it wasn't going to take much for him to sack Robbie and I'm sorry, but Champions League exits (probably), batterings in the Super Cup and losses away to West Brom and Swansea were always going to be more than enough reason for him to sack Robbie. That meant he had to go to Plan B and that was Rafa. I hate being in a position where it looks like I'm trying to defend Benitez, but I'm actually trying to explain Roman's thinking. I actually think whoever was in charge, we were going to suffer because we need a top manager and there really aren't many around.

I'm including his whole resumé so that includes his time at Inter as well as his time at Liverpool and Valencia plus his two UEFA Manager of the Year titles. When comparing him to Robbie, should we include his time at MK Dons and West Brom?

1. I know Benitez is hated, but is he really not any better than Robbie as a manager? His resumé is pretty impressive. 2. Robbie's tenure in charge wasn't perfect by any means. The Champions League win glossed over a lot of things if we're being honest (the 2-0 defeat to Newcastle, the Super Cup, Juventus Home, Shaktar Away, West Brom Away, Swansea Away, Liverpool Home). I'm not defending Rafa (in fact some of the things I've read about him today worry me greatly) but we have to be fair about this and look at why Roman might've done what he did. Once he decided that Robbie wasn't the right man for the job, he had to look at who was best from what was available. It was probably easy to remove sentiment from the appointment of Rafa because it was sentiment that led him to appoint Robbie.

And when will they go there? If City win the league, can you imagine Mancini getting the sack or Ferguson wanting to quit after coming second in the league twice in a row? I think there's a few variables that mean it's nowhere near as certain as you're suggesting.

Even if it's just until summer, it doesn't seem that bad a deal. I imagine we could probably flog him for at least £5 million in the summer and the one thing he does is score goals. There's a myth we don't create chances - I think we simply need a short-term poacher like him or Bent just to get us to the end of the season.

I wonder if there are still any teams out there willing to offer £20 million for David Luiz.

Honestly I think a lot of that is media bs. He isn't perfect, but he's one of the better owners in world football. Let's not forget that he has only owned a club for 10 years. He's still learning the best way to go about it and that will obviously involve a few missteps but he has been rather successful too. Now he's trying to do it properly by becoming somewhat self-sufficient but he needs the right manager for that. He tried with AVB and that didn't work, so he sacked him (and we won the Champions League). The next person he identified was Guadiola but he wasn't available so he had to go with Robbie. But Robbie didn't work out (Champions League exit, Community Shield, Super Cup) so he decided he needed an interim manager. That doesn't make him a megalomaniac in my opinion - it makes him human. He's made mistakes, but he's also done a shit load of good for this club and the right manager will get his support.

Because it would be a totally clean slate. Sometimes you have to hit rock bottom before you can make big changes and in a lot of ways it would ease the pressure on the manager coming in. If he goes to United, he's following the greatest British manager of all time. If he goes to City, he could be following the guy who won two league titles in a row. If he comes to Chelsea, the only way is up yet he has lots of young talent who play football the right way and a decent amount of money to spend.

It's not that bad. Players need to face adversity to grow and this will be good long-term. Plus the less players on twitter the better.

Well the constant factor in the last 26 years has been Fergie. It's weird, but sometimes it's easy to forget that he's probably the greatest British manager of all time, and it's not just him who will leave. Scholes and Giggs will go too, as may a couple of the older coaches. Plus there's Rio, Evra, Vidic and Carrick all over 30. It's going to be a massive period of upheaval and let's be honest, that team they've got right now is nowhere near perfect especially compared to the one of previous years. In fact they've been pretty lucky this season in a couple of big games whilst they're conceding goals to poor teams like Reading, QPR and Southampton. I don't think Moyes is the gamble - I think Mourinho is. Moyes's appointment would be one that indicates a period of rebuilding over 3-5 years. Mourinho's would be a statement that we're going to win and win now. That puts a lot of pressure on the board to release funds and I don't think the Glazers want to do that.

When Fergie retires, United are going to have to spend big and I don't know if the Glazers want to do that to be honest. I also can't see Mourinho staying there for 10 years. City is the better fit for him in my opinion whilst I really could see United going for someone like Moyes. The way Roman is acting, I think he only has eyes for one person which is why he's avoided any long-term appointments.

Shit....so it is. That's my morning sorted. The players came out to the music from Star Wars :blue scalf: :blue scalf: Panucci at right back for Real, apparently Doobs in on our right-wing.

I love Mata. I love that he's an intelligent, well-rounded man who just happens to be a great footballer. The club, not just the team, should be built around men like this. Such a great role model for the young players too.

So Fellaini wouldn't be good for the DM role, but David Luiz would be??? David Luiz, to me, has none of the things you look for in a DM. They need intelligence, awareness and a high level of discipline. Which of those words applies to David Luiz without the words 'is entirely bereft of' in front of them?? Physically and technically he's brilliant. But he is a fucking moron. I'm sorry, but when it comes to the mental aspect of the game he is the opposite of someone like Makelele or even Terry. Fellaini on the other hand seems to offer all the things we'd need in that position. He's a hard-worker, he passes the ball well, he gets stuck in (a little too much at times but he's still young and learning) and he's great in the air. He also offers additional benefits going forward when you need a goal. As for David Luiz, if we could get more than £20 million for him then we should sell him. Great player, nice guy but not a defender in my opinion.

Agree with all of this. He won't stick around long and I don't know what the plan would be for him to be honest. If you look at his previous jobs then they all have similar motifs - we want you to come in and win NOW. What we want is completely different. We want someone to come in and build something new and long-term. I think that's probably why Man City would be the ideal spot for him. The target there would be Champions League within three years - that's Mourinho down to a tee. The United job would be slightly different - they'd want success after Ferguson to basically show everyone that they can survive when he goes. He could well win something there, but I honestly think they'd see a downturn in fortunes after he left. The smart move for United is to probably go for another long-term appointment and suffer through a few bad years. But I think you are spot on with the Roman things too. It's one thing to kiss and make up, but as soon as you're back in a working relationship and hit a bad spot it's way too easy to dredge up old shit.