Euro 2012: success of the Premier League will always wring England players dry and leave them exhausted Over the last three or four tournaments for which England have qualified, despite the preparation beforehand, the players have always looked tired before being eliminated. The game against Italy was a case in point. Andrea Pirlo, who was magnificent for the Italians, tired towards the end of the game, just as he did against Croatia in the group stages. But the England players were simply more tired than Pirlo and they could not get close to him. The futility of playing in a 4-4-2 system contributed to England's fatigue because midfielders such as Scott Parker and Steven Gerrard were consistently outnumbered in midfield. From being England's best player of the tournament, when he had been commanding in midfield, Gerrard found himself chasing the ball all the time against Italy because of the lack of numbers in the centre of the pitch. So the combination of fatigue and outdated tactics made life so much more difficult for England against the Italians. Both issues can be resolved, but I doubt whether, in the first instance, there will be an appetite to introduce a winter break for the good of the England team. The Premier League has just seen its broadcast income go through the roof with the latest television deal, but if a winter break were introduced, would fixtures be reduced as a result and, if so, would it affect the money the league generates? The league is also so strong that a game between Manchester City and Wolves, last season's top and bottom, would be contested much more keenly than a similar fixture in Spain or Italy. Because of the demands of playing in England, I would always want to be on a beach by the end of April, not just because I was drained physically, but also mentally. The same applies to the current players, but if a winter break was introduced, the clubs would almost certainly fly their players off for games in Asia or the Middle East. Tactically, there is obviously room for improvement because the game is constantly evolving. Many teams are now playing like City did last season, with a 4-2-3-1 formation, because it helps prevent the problem England experienced against Italy, of being outnumbered in midfield. Whenever that happens, if your opponents are half-decent, then you will be in trouble and, with 4-4-2, it is easy for the other team to play between the lines. Playing 4-2-3-1 worked for City, but Holland played that way at Euro 2012 and lost every game, so you have to play the system that suits the players. It would not have been too difficult for Wayne Rooney to drop back into midfield against Italy, though, because he has played that role on many occasions for Manchester United during games away from Old Trafford. Any system has to work for the players, though. When Italy won the World Cup in 1982, they played with a sweeper and, despite having great success with a flat back four at Liverpool, we tried to introduce a sweeper because we wanted to stay ahead of the rest. But we just could not get it to work because we did not know how to operate the system. The players are the key, however, and the fact of the matter is that, while there was not a bad player in the England squad, there were not any great ones. If you go to Rio de Janeiro, you will see young kids spending all day and all night kicking a ball on Copacabana beach, but society is different in England and it is no longer "football or football" when it comes to kids keeping themselves entertained. There are many more distractions for youngsters, but footballers start becoming players by kicking a ball with their friends at five and six, not when they are 15. If they are playing with laptop computers, they are not playing football and that means fewer promising players will develop. But that is not a new development. Just like the tiredness and tactics, it is an old problem, so will it ever change?