Completely pointless to speculate on something 3 years down the line.
IMO there's no point selecting players you can say all but certainly that they won't be around in 2007.
However, I'm not sure who amongst the Australians Craig reckons won't be playing then? Just because you haven't had a wholesale clear-out after each World Cup (or big Test-series) most certainly isn't a bad thing IMO.
Mark Nicholas and Alec Stewart said that countless times last summer. Alec kept saying "there's always a call for a massive clear-out after every Ashes\World Cup"; Mark responds "but that's just the thing - there's never been one". Alec must have been thinking (I know I was) "well thank God for that". Alec's point appeared to be that this call is a very, very bad idea and the resistance to it is good.
South Africa did the best thing IMO - Donald, Kirsten and Rhodes retired through their own option (Caddick, Knight, Stewart and Hussain did for England) and the rest of the players (Smith, Gibbs, Kallis, McKenzie, Dippenaar, Boucher, Pollock, Ntini) were all going to be there in 2007 in all likelihood anyway. So they kept them and brought in someone with a fantastic domestic record (Rudolph) to replace Kirsten and Rhodes, and he was an immidiate success. Now Nel re-emerges and Klusener comes back from his IMO wrongful axing. It's coming together again; the worrying thing is, with a side as good as this, they've lost to mediocre teams like England (3 out of 4 :O ), West Indies (1 out of 4) and Pakistan (2 out of 5).
Still, all is not right within the South African one-day camp.
)
