Originally Posted by Spark
Nah, I just don't think he should get special treatment just because he has a high strike rate. He hasn't proved any more about his short/medium-term value in Tests than, say, Hughes had in 2009 or Clarke had in 2005. Long term, sure, he might be gun, but that doesn't mean we can't drop him if he needs dropping.
He's a young, up-and-coming batsman who's shown promise but is still a bit inconsistent, that's all, and it's hardly rare.
I disagree that he hasn't proved more than Hughes had in 2009. Hughes' success in 2009 was based around his centuries against SA, where he was basically fed a lot deliveries to his off-side strength. His weaknesses weren't exploited well enough. I'm not saying Warner doesn't have any weaknesses by any means, but his centuries have shown he is comparatively a much more complete player than Hughes was. And of course he shouldn't be immune to being dropped, but unless it's for a more alarming period of low scores, the fact he is a more finished product should give him more leeway....especially if the replacement has even less of a reason to be there.