The case of Shane Watson is an interesting one. For me to try and make an honest judgement of his cricketing abilities I need to segregate my personal feelings and dislike towards him (probably a little unfair as he has done nothing to me, just a hunch!) when assessing his skills. The biggest threat to his place in the team for me is the fact he is supposedly upsetting the morale of the side, if this is indeed accurate. At a time when the whole squad need to be pulling in the same direction, his undermining or general disruption would be most unwelcome. I appreciate personal differences, such as his with Michael Clarke, are not crucial to the side winning matches, but when the team are not winning games this is obviously magnified and tempers are frayed somewhat quicker, which certainly will not help. The situation between Clarke and Watson is in my mind incomparable to the differences with Shane Warne and Steve Waugh, they were two world class cricketers within a superb Test side, rifts are so much easier to cope with when the side is sweeping all before them.
I am still hugely pleased when England dismiss Watson, typically when he's trapped in front of all three, and this is due partly to my joy at seeing his smug face reduced to a scowl seemingly close to tears, but also because of the threat he represents to our side. He is a frustration for all Aussies I'm sure, a man who can look a million dollars driving with such authority and quick to pull anything slightly back of a length off the front foot before falling to the type of dismissal where a technical flaw has failed to have been ironed out despite it curtailing so many a promising innings. Top players always find a way to overcome these issues, they may not disappear but they are certainly not as obvious series after series.
His conversion of 50's to 100's is woeful, and with his style of positive cricket it all points to a place in the middle order. An opportunity when batting with the tail where he can switch into T20 mode and play with more freedom without trying to construct an innings over several sessions.
It's unlikely he is ever going to replicate anything like the Langers or Haydens statistics at the top, but surely he scores consistently enough (if not big enough scores) to be retained in this side if in a lesser batting capacity, ie down the order. His bowling we know can be useful in giving the side control, but he must buy into the team plans and ethic while maintaining his own personal opinions on things.