Different Rules for Watson and Maxwell?

Let me say up front that, as a Cricket Tragic, I have no brief for Glenn Maxwell. I believe he is overrated, and despite his obvious talent with the bat, until he gets rid of these trick shots he plays he cannot be a cricketer at the highest level. When you see him play his on drive along the ground to the boundary, or play the pull shot, you can see what he has. But he just doesn't respect his wicket enough.

Having said that, is it not complete hypocrisy of our National Selection Panel to give Maxwell the flick in this way, when it held on to Shane Watson for YEARS when he did nothing?!? I realise that this is largely a different panel to the one who held on to Watson for so many years when he failed to deliver on any level, but was always held on to because of his "talent" as an "all rounder" and his "ability" to "win games" on his own. Sound familiar in regards as to what is said about Maxwell?

I applaud the NSP for recognising that he needs to work harder to gain his place. But given the number of chances that Watson was handed in the previous five to seven years with form similar to Maxwell's, it does smack of hypocrisy.

One would also wonder how James Faulkner and Matthew Wade hold their places in this team, and Travis Head, who was given one opportunity in the West Indies, is now on the outer.