In the 2006 World Cup, England’s squad of players was so strong that many people were left bitterly disappointed as they saw such high-calibre players being knocked out in the quarter-finals yet again.

While I heard many fans saying it was our last chance of a trophy with this group of players, I believe that we will never have a better chance than in South Africa in two years' time. Unfortunately, in my opinion 2010 could be our last chance for a while.

Presuming England qualify, their squad will boast top-quality players at their prime. Steven Gerrard will be 30 next time around, Rio Ferdinand 31 and John Terry 29. If Fabio Capello can sort out the problems of the last few years and get the team playing well, there will be a great opportunity for success. Despite this, in my opinion the England squad will need a new generation of players after 2010 - and it is hard to see where they will come from.

Looking at the England squad that beat Germany 5-1 in 2001, not only do I see four or five world-class young players in the starting 11, but also in the rest of the squad, not to mention the Under-21s. Compared to now, young players such as Theo Walcott and Micah Richards have failed to make a huge impression and it’s hard to see any of the Under-21s making the step up any time soon.

The starting 11 in 2001 is very similar in terms of core players to the starting 11 now and many of the Under-21 players were destined to have big futures - Joe Cole, Gareth Barry and Jermain Defoe to name a few.

In my opinion the main cause of the lack of home-grown talent recently may the influx of foreign players to our national league.  English players are given increasingly fewer chances to impress the senior managers - thus hindering their development. Only 170 players who started matches in the Premier League last season were English; just 34.1% of the total, compared to other major leagues such as the Serie A where roughly 70% of the players were home-grown last season.

Last season’s Champions League proved that the league currently dominating European football is the English League, with three of the four semi-finalists from England, and Arsenal and Liverpool only being knocked out by English opposition. In the final, however, only 10 of the 22 starting players were English.  When Arsenal made the final in 2006, they started with only two Englishman on the field. Liverpool fielded two English players in Istanbul 2005 and only three in Athens two years later.

One solution may be to bring in a limit of foreigners per squad in each game, much like the Spanish League. Sepp Blatter, the FIFA president, is one man in favour of this. He wants clubs to be limited to starting a maximum of five foreigners, encouraging the development of home-grown talent. Says Blatter: “When you have 11 foreigners in a team, this is not good for the development of football, for the education of young players, and there is a financial aspect, too.''

The question is, would limiting the amount of foreigners improve the standard of home-grown talent, or in fact weaken the standard of our Premier League? After all, since the number of foreigners has risen, there has been a significant improvement from English clubs whilst in European competition.

An alternative that may solve this conundrum may be to allow teams to have an unlimited amount of under-20 home-grown players in their squad after their seven named substitutes.  For example, if a team are comfortably winning and don’t feel the need to use one of their five subs, they could give an under-20 player some top-flight experience.

So what is the answer? It’s clear Capello, or whoever is in charge, will have fewer options to choose from after the 2010 World Cup.  It is also easy to see the future getting worse if things don’t improve. Is limiting the amount of foreigners in our league necessary or do we need to think of something else?