[Nightmare]

Supras, on 28 January 2012 - 11:07, said:

Yeah, I know, I had that exact position throughout. Misrepresenting my view will get you no where, I was never ever so stupid as to claim it was the only factor - I argued vociferously against that view. It was only Nightmare who was so stupid as to claim it wasn't a factor at all - are you also holding that view now?

The population was used in comparison of two footballing nations - I think it was Czech Republic and Scotland. I don't agree it's less of a factor, if San Marion had a great history, coaching and infrastructure would they be a good team? I also disagree that the Netherlands has a very small population - it is around 16 million after all.

The fact is the most successful footballing nations also tend to be the largest. The most successful in the world? Brazil - the largest. The most successful in Europe? Germany - the largest (caveat about pre unification and aw that). What about the third most successful? Italy - another very large nation.

Netherlands are good but they are no where near any of the above despite having, arguably, better coaching and history. Why is that? Population held them back. It's very simple logic, you can coach them as much as you want but you've only got a certain amount of people to choose from. There is nothing Scotland can do to produce as many good players as, say, England. The odds are just against us.

I never said population isn't a factor at all for a general comparison between countries for football. Obviously it is somewhat a factor. For the purpose of the argument at the time, with you comparing Scotland and Czech Republic, I said it wasn't a factor. There's a big difference in saying it with regards to that one comparison, than to the argument as a whole. Because clearly Czech Republic being better at football than us has f**k all to do with population seeing as the Czech Republic, in the grand scheme of things, is still a relatively small country. Your exact quote was "because they have a far larger population" - err, no they don't. Less than double Scotland's populaiton is not "far larger".

For every Brazil, Germany and Italy being large countries, there are equally good countries in Netherlands, Portugal and Uruguay who have a fraction of the population of theirs. This is where you fell on your arse last time, so I'm not sure why you've brought it up again. This was all put to you by many people other than myself, but which you took major exception to for some reason and put a fake quote in your signature because it bothered you so much that people were pulling you up for talking nonsense. Feel free to get angry like that again, it was very amusing last time.

[Supras]

Nightmare, on 29 January 2012 - 17:34, said:

I never said population isn't a factor at all for a general comparison between countries for football. Obviously it is somewhat a factor. For the purpose of the argument at the time, with you comparing Scotland and Czech Republic, I said it wasn't a factor. There's a big difference in saying it with regards to that one comparison, than to the argument as a whole. Because clearly Czech Republic being better at football than us has f**k all to do with population seeing as the Czech Republic, in the grand scheme of things, is still a relatively small country. Your exact quote was "because they have a far larger population" - err, no they don't. Less than double Scotland's populaiton is not "far larger".

For every Brazil, Germany and Italy being large countries, there are equally good countries in Netherlands, Portugal and Uruguay who have a fraction of the population of theirs. This is where you fell on your arse last time, so I'm not sure why you've brought it up again. This was all put to you by many people other than myself, but which you took major exception to for some reason and put a fake quote in your signature because it bothered you so much that people were pulling you up for talking nonsense. Feel free to get angry like that again, it was very amusing last time.

Then why did you say population "had f**k all to do with it"? Are you now willing to admit that was wrong?

Somewhat a factor? It is either or it isn't - and it clearly is.

Less than double? It is hardly less than double at all, Czech Republic have over ten million people and Scotland have just over 5. Are you really saying having almost double the amount of players to choose from won't affect the standard of the team? You can't be serious, right? Take two high schools from the same street, the one with twice the pupils will probably have a better football team. It is simple mathmatics.

The question why are Czech Republic better is simple - they have a far larger population than Scotland. Almost exactly double in fact, Scotland cannot realistically expect to finish ahead of nations that are almost twice our size. Doing so would be an incredible achievement, not doing so is not a failure.

Erm, what have Portugal ever achieved? Where I fell on my arse? Really? Why don't you highlight the exact post because, uh, it didn't happen. Ever.

Who else put it to me? Be specific. Because from what I remember it was only you who said "Population has f**k all to do with it" and it took you months to surrender and say "oh, but I only meant it in relation to Scotland and Czech Republic". Why didn't you say that at the time then? Or at numerous replies to it? Slip your mind or something? You made a full of yourself and have taken months to think of a suitable back track - really poor show.

[Nightmare]

Supras, on 29 January 2012 - 19:03, said:

Then why did you say population "had f**k all to do with it"? Are you now willing to admit that was wrong?

Somewhat a factor? It is either or it isn't - and it clearly is.

Less than double? It is hardly less than double at all, Czech Republic have over ten million people and Scotland have just over 5. Are you really saying having almost double the amount of players to choose from won't affect the standard of the team? You can't be serious, right? Take two high schools from the same street, the one with twice the pupils will probably have a better football team. It is simple mathmatics.

The question why are Czech Republic better is simple - they have a far larger population than Scotland. Almost exactly double in fact, Scotland cannot realistically expect to finish ahead of nations that are almost twice our size. Doing so would be an incredible achievement, not doing so is not a failure.

Erm, what have Portugal ever achieved? Where I fell on my arse? Really? Why don't you highlight the exact post because, uh, it didn't happen. Ever.

Who else put it to me? Be specific. Because from what I remember it was only you who said "Population has f**k all to do with it" and it took you months to surrender and say "oh, but I only meant it in relation to Scotland and Czech Republic". Why didn't you say that at the time then? Or at numerous replies to it? Slip your mind or something? You made a full of yourself and have taken months to think of a suitable back track - really poor show.

I'm not backtracking on anything.

You said "The Czech Republic are a better side than us, and they are a better side because they have a far larger population."
I said "Population had f**k all to do with it"

If you took that to mean that I think population has nothing to do with anything then that's your misunderstanding. Nobody else questioned me on it, possibly because they have comprehension skills. I probably never specified at the time because I was too busy laughing at you getting so angry on the internet.

What have Portugal ever achieved? A great deal more than Peru, who have 3 times their population, or Poland, who have 4 times their population, or Colombia, who have 4 and a half times their population. Oh and by the way, Colombia has a bigger population than Argentina. This isn't going very well for you, is it? If Czech Republic beat Scotland because they have a "far higher" population, then what's the deal here?

Oh yeah, and double the population is "far higher"? Nah. 5m-10m is not "far higher".

As for other people who argued the point at the time:
Reynard, H_B, Blue Suede Monkey, ICTChris, Eckauskas, Scary Bear are all people you quoted in the midst of that thread because they argued against your population comment. And that's just on the first 3 pages, I can't even be bothered going through the next 4 to find if there are any more. Suffice to say, you have failed once again.

I also noticed the "getting their house in order" was actually a quote from Blue Suede Monkey and not myself, like you have quoted. It also had nothing to do with San Marino. In fact, the only person who continually brought up San Marino was you, for some reason. That's interesting. I suppose we can attribute it to your breakdown?

[Supras]

Nightmare, on 29 January 2012 - 20:38, said:

I'm not backtracking on anything.

You said "The Czech Republic are a better side than us, and they are a better side because they have a far larger population."
I said "Population had f**k all to do with it"

If you took that to mean that I think population has nothing to do with anything then that's your misunderstanding. Nobody else questioned me on it, possibly because they have comprehension skills. I probably never specified at the time because I was too busy laughing at you getting so angry on the internet.

What have Portugal ever achieved? A great deal more than Peru, who have 3 times their population, or Poland, who have 4 times their population, or Colombia, who have 4 and a half times their population. Oh and by the way, Colombia has a bigger population than Argentina. This isn't going very well for you, is it? If Czech Republic beat Scotland because they have a "far higher" population, then what's the deal here?

So population is a factor just not in the case of Czech Republic or Scotland - two footballing nations. Hmmm. When is it a valid comparison then? What countries can you compare?

Czech Republic is not "relatively small" compared to Scotland it is substantially larger than Scotland.

Yeah, too busy laughing. Heard it. As for your statement being misunderstood because of lack of comprehension, you do know what comprehension means right? I wasn't "angry" in any sense, you made a fool of yourself and are desperately trying to cover your tracks.

Now you are falling into the trap of thinking population is the only factor, which I seem to dispute in every single post I make. Peru is hardly ideal terrain for football whilst Columbia, well, murders referees and its top players. Hmmm, I do wonder why they don't do well.

This is exactly how it is going:

- Population is a major factor. Obviously not the only factor though.
- But, but, China! Columbia! Peru!
- Erm, I've already said it wasn't the only factor.

How many times will this go on a loop before you accept that it is a major factor and it isn't the only factor? Why do you insist on focusing on one point whilst ignoring the other? At least H_B showed some tact by relenting, you just dig the same hole over and over again.

Quote

Oh yeah, and double the population is "far higher"? Nah. 5m-10m is not "far higher".

As for other people who argued the point at the time:
Reynard, H_B, Blue Suede Monkey, ICTChris, Eckauskas, Scary Bear are all people you quoted in the midst of that thread because they argued against your population comment. And that's just on the first 3 pages, I can't even be bothered going through the next 4 to find if there are any more. Suffice to say, you have failed once again.

I also noticed the "getting their house in order" was actually a quote from Blue Suede Monkey and not myself, like you have quoted. It also had nothing to do with San Marino. In fact, the only person who continually brought up San Marino was you, for some reason. That's interesting. I suppose we can attribute it to your breakdown?

What? Why not? When did you determine what "far higher" was? How much higher would it have to be for you to think it is "far higher"?

Of course it is far higher! It is almost exactly double! FFS they literally have almost double the number of potential players to choose from

Really? Where's your evidence of this? Did anyone else say population wasn't a factor at all or was that just you?

Why can't San Marino do well? Do the Czech Republic have a far higher population than they do? It's only 10 million after all!

Just to clarify you think:

1) Of course population is a factor.
2) It isn't a factor between Czech Republic and Scotland because the Czech Republic has only twice the population of Scotland - and that really isn't much.

It's like being called crazy by a man in a straight jacket.