Sorry Watto, it is time to go

Yeah good call Ramesh. I think the UAE is the perfect place to play him. He plays Ajmal better than anyone I've seen.

A no talent bum?? Fair go, Watson is an excellent limited overs player and he has had a good batting average in tests lately.

I think Glen Maxwell should be given a go as he is a talented player who needs some time and backing to find his feet in the national cricket team. Therefore as others players such as Phil Hughes, Alex Doolan and Usman Khawaja have been give the opportunity in the past, it is time that Glen Maxwell is given that opportunity. After all if he replaces Watson for example, Maxwell is also an all rounder like Watson.

If I recall the selection policy in SA for Watto, was 'if your not fit to bowl, your not fit to play' Completely appropriate for mine. He still adds value as an allrounder, and allows us flexibility in other areas. Let Faulkner and Maxwell have another season on the fringes and prove themselves. Wattos time as a batsman only has finished, we'd be much better investing elsewhere on that count.

WOW!! Someone who totally agrees with the SWDS. We have been saying this for 3 years. The turning point for me was when he acted like a little child who had their favorite toy taken off them when he got Gayle out. The man is a no talent bum who with his continued presence in the team is holding back potential all rounders in Faulkner and Mitch Marsh. Piss him off and let's never speak his name again.

Wow! I admire your rage - if not your lack of grammar and punctuation. But yes - Watto has a lot to offer. Re his bowling - he ties up an end for wickets fall at the other time and time again. Check his average RPO vs the Poms. They could barely get him off the square. Yes he plays lazy shots - my mates and I all say he's due to wave his bat at one when he's on 50, the over before lunch or the over after lunch. It's a mind thing - the difference between good and great is mentality.

Your gimmick aims to bring attention to this website just to create a yet another controversial Watto article in the middle of holiday(cricket) season. Nobody is playing cricket now. Watto is not playing. You people are making a life out of Watto. You are really a rookie. & go suck your kid clarke's A**. At this age, he shouldn't be bowling. But i know that those losers will make him bowl cos they wanna injure him. Just as a batsman, Shane is far better than your fangirl heroes. Your heroes maxwell, doolan,.. etc etc have not been tested against great bowling. (((By "great bowling", i mean good bowler on good test pitches, although for the past few years, not even a single test has been played on good pitches. This generation has not witnessed real cricket))). Clarke failed all the time against "great bowling"(not including spin). Watto was tested hundreds of times & succeded(turn back & watch australian test cricket in 2009,10 where he was the only right-handed batsman to survive especially those series played against pakistan coz bowl was moving around like crazy as it should in test cricket. Remember Amir. I don't talk abt left handers coz left-handers are rarely (or never) tested by "great bowling". Almost all bowlers are naturally used to right-hand batsman. Left-batsman have a great advantage. You will never see a mirror image of great bowling. 99% of the time, the path of the ball before pitching, goes away to a left hander which is easy like hell for a batsman). Anyway, Is Watto great like he was 3 years ago? No. he is not. But is he good enough for "todays bowling"(i mean bowling on mediocre pitches)? You damn right he is. Infact he's better than the rest. I know the first thing geeks like u will do is "show stats". Stats is BS. One can make a good batsman look "mediocre" by putting him in most uncomfortable postions. Also one can make bad batsman "shine" by placing him in most comfortable situations. These days, any no.11 can score hundreds in tests, but that never happened before, coz they played CRICKET. Todays cricket is baseball. I know u'll never understand anything i wrote, coz Your brain is the size of my balls. & your brain balls is not capable enough to understand how the world is functioning with Politics&corruption(ofcourse including cricket). You wrote an article with "Is it time time for watto to go?" & yet you headline it with "It is time for you to go". I'll tell you what, "Sorry william, it is time for u to go". But no, you wont, cos you are a A** kisser like clarke. So, go fuc* yourself which is what u were doing before writing this garbage.

Can't agree Siddle is hopeless, although he was badly out of form and/or exhausted when dropped in SAf. Don't think we've heard the last of him yet. Could be valuable against Pakistan in UAE as third quick if injury rules out Pattinson and/or Starc, and, although obviously not an all-rounder, he can handle a bat. Have to agree about Hughes though. Should be our first pick number three. Recent Australian cricket history is littered with players whose cards appear to have been marked by selectors. Matthews, Wade, Steve O'Keeffe to name three. There are many more and I hope for Hughes' sake he isn't the latest addition to the list.

Hughes doesn't perform when in the team, his test average attests to that. Watto is value and Siddle is far from hopeless. Dunno where you're getting this champ.

Not sure it is fair comparing him to Siddle. Siddle is hopeless. Watto has to go though, he doesnt score enough. P Hughes must have rooted someones daughter because the bloke can bat. Why does he keep getting dropped

I think that Watto is getting very close to his use-by date, but is not quite there yet. After so much time either in the side, or on the sidelines because of injury, it still seems as if he has to prove he is worthy of his place in the side (only talking about Tests here). That said, Australia's seeming obsession with having a great all-rounder in the side is totally misplaced. Cricket has changed - bowlers are expected to be able to bat and, equally, it helps a lot to have a batsman or two who can roll their arm over. The true definition of an all-rounder is someone who can hold their place in the side virtue of their batting alone or their bowling alone. Watto has really never filled that role. Australia would be far better off developing the bowling skills of batsmen who have shown some form with the ball, and the batting skills of bowlers who have shown some form with the bat. I'm not saying Watto deserves to be dropped now, but consider this side's credentials without Watto. Warner, Rogers, Hughes, Clarke, Smith, Maxwell, Haddin, Johnson, Faulkner, Pattinson, Lyon. Bats down to ten and includes four front-line bowlers and four part-timers. Who needs a true "all-rounder", even if one could be found? Comments?

I agree with all three Brumby Jack, BHT and Bearfax. This article does not address the points. He is not just a batsman now, that is wrong. He is still an all-rounder with an important job to do in both relieving the pressure from the quicks, and drying up runs. His form with the bat over the last year has also been much better. To anyone who has read this site over the years, I've never been a fan of Watson, but on his form in the last two series I just cannot say he does not deserves to keep his spot. And also, the only real replacement options for Watson are Maxwell and Faulkner, but Maxwell is a spinner and Faulkner a bowling (not batting) all-rounder.

Though I think Watson is close to his used by date, I still think he has something to offer as long as he is able to bowl effectively. His batting has been adequate, if not always test quality. But its his bowling that effectively ties up an end with his accurate medium pacers and puts the pressure on batsmen trying to keep the scoring moving along. It also assists the fast bowlers in giving them longer rest periods. I think as long as he can contribute with the ball, I would be reluctant to drop him. But as a batsman only, Australia would benefit far more from Hughes in the No 2 or 3 position or Maxwell at 6.

It's so easy to check these things, so I don't understand why people don't do that before typing stuff. In the home Ashes series, he took 4 wickets - he got Carberry out 3 times and Root once. In England he got 2 wickets overall, Cook once and Root once. His great value is that he bowls dry, it's really not in his wicket-taking. He's about as useful as a part-timer in that area unless it's a green wicket, then he is more than useful. As regards his batting, he's been much more consistent recently, only his runs appear soft (if any international runs can be considered that) compared to other players like Clarke or Smith. I think his spot is going to become more contentious depending on how the next Shield season goes, not many have his experience though, that can't be replicated.

Will, the criticism is fair. However you have missed the point with his all rounder status. Yes, he might not take huge 5 wicket halls like a Johnson or Cummins, but his time with the ball plays a huge part in the balance of the attack. On numerous occasions last year in both Ashes series, but particularly the home Ashes series, he got vital wickets at the TOP of the order when Siddle and others couldn't make the break through. He often got Cook and Bells wickets, the two best batsman in the England team. So while you say his batting average doesn't stack up, which it doesn't, his value as an all rounder does when you think about the balance he gives the attack.