Watson and Maxwell are the real all-rounders in the side, Christian is just playing as a bowler. In that case, I'd rather pick a better bowler. It doesn't change the balance of the side at all because he's not getting a bat.
Exactly. Plus if he is playing as a bowler, it's not a very good one. You can see it every time Australia are in the field. Christian is always the 4th seamer used, and he's always the one who is given the least overs, and the guy who is trusted the least. To have your #8 as a borderline 5th bowler is not good balance.
I can see the value of having a guy that can bat at #8, but he is only going to be used when the top order absolutely fails. Does it gives the top order batsmen 'security' by knowing the batting is deep? If that is the theory it doesn't seem to be working, the Aussie middle order is currently playing pretty poorly. I personally believe that it makes you play WORSE if you know that the batting lineup is longer because you lose some of that responsibility in your batting eg. in the back of your mind you are thinking that someone ELSE can do the job if you get out.
Think about a team instead that had McKay + D.Hussey instead of Christian + White/Maxwell. You get better seam bowling with McKay over Christian, you get D.Hussey's spin which is virtually as good as Maxwell's. The only thing you lose is your specialist batting at #8 and I think that's not worth much at all. Certainly not worth hamstringing your captain for. Because as it stands, if 1 or 2 of Starc, Cummins and Watson go the journey, then there is very little that Bailey can do. And I'm surprised he lets the selectors give him so few options. Hogg is purely dependent on batsmen not reading him (and bowling too many wronguns...), while Christian and Maxwell aren't great options if they need to get the innings back on track - good for some cheap overs in the middle like happened vs Ireland - but they don't have the quality to really trouble batsmen who are on top.