Can somebody please tell Mitchell Johnson why?
"Why a struggling Test opener gets to nominate his own retirement date," Johnson wrote as he savaged Australian opener David Warner and chair of selectors George Bailey in an extraordinary column for The West Australian.
"And why a player at the centre of one of the biggest scandals in Australian cricket history warrants a hero's send-off?"
Let's start with the first part. It was on June 3 Warner told us if he could get through the World Test Championship and the Ashes and make the Pakistan series, just make it, he would walk away at the SCG.
It was hardly a brash declaration, but that won't suit Johnson's narrative - one pushed by plenty of Warner's detractors.
How often have you heard a player say this will be their last season, their last roll of the dice before they're marched away from the table and thrown out for good?
Perhaps the only difference here is Warner's planned farewell at the SCG - which would usually mark the final Test of the Australian summer - falls right in the middle. A two-Test series against the West Indies will follow, at which point selectors will have to find a replacement at the top of the order.
That predicament has finally restored relevance to the Prime Minister's XI ahead of a four-day game against Pakistan at Manuka Oval beginning on Wednesday.
They have combined for 38 Tests and have just one century between them. Bancroft averages 26.23, Renshaw 29.31 and Harris 25.29.
Bancroft has spent the past two summers banging down the door at Sheffield Shield level and at some point, those runs have to count for something. But there may be a scenario in which runs in Canberra this week may not be enough.
Australian selectors may opt to shuffle the deck chairs to find Warner's replacement. The prospect of moving Marnus Labuschagne or Travis Head to the top of the order and allowing Cameron Green and Mitchell Marsh to play in the same XI is not out of the equation.
Selectors are not sold on who Warner's replacement should be. So why make a change now? Why not allow him to play the series against Pakistan until a clear heir emerges?
And now, as we address the second part of Johnson's question, we let the former fast bowler pick at the scab of the scandal which left Australian cricket with a black eye it took years to recover from.
"It's been five years and David Warner has still never really owned the ball-tampering scandal. Now the way he is going out is underpinned by more of the same arrogance and disrespect to our country," Johnson wrote.
How exactly do we want Warner to own it? By throwing his teammates under the bus? Because my tip is you'd be nave to think they were unaware.
"Warner certainly isn't Australia's Test captain and never deserved to be for that matter. In fact, he ends his career under a lifetime leadership ban," Johnson continued.
A ridiculous punishment for one of the biggest beat-ups of all time.
"Yes, he has a decent overall record and some say is one of our greatest opening bats," Johnson wrote. "But his past three years in Test cricket have been ordinary, with a batting average closer to what a tail-ender would be happy with."
Warner's numbers put him in the conversation to be at the top of the order for Australia's greatest Test XI of all time. He has scored 8487 Test runs and posted 25 Test centuries. Those records exceed those of Justin Langer.
While we're here, Johnson's attack on Warner comes two years after he lashed Pat Cummins in his newspaper column when Langer was ousted as Australian coach, damaging relationships which are still not repaired to this day.
There was a time players would sit on the fence when it came to those they had played with. Now, it seems experts are trying harder to stay relevant in a saturated market and relationships count for little.
"Does this really warrant a swansong, a last hurrah against Pakistan that was forecast a year in advance as if he was bigger than the game and the Australian cricket team," Johnson asked.
The answer is yes.