There aren't even 70m people in the UK never mind England
England's population is 53 million not 70
Uruguays population is about half that. About 1/15th that of England.won twice as many world cups too. At some point the English will realise that their not really that good when it comes to international football
53 million is still embarrassing.
Not as embarrassing as china
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
China has no footballing pedigree compared to mighty Engerland.
What population do we have to get to before we can produce a world class player? So Uruguay only need 6 million to produce 2 world class players. We're at 53 million and still can't produce one.
This doesn't even take into account our financial resources which are probably more important than the population difference.
It's only a matter of time before China overtake England on the world stage.
Financial resources mean feck all, Brazil have consistently produced great players and they're not rich not to mention countless African players. Talent is talent you either have it or you don't
comment by Heads shoulders knees John Stones, knees John Stones (U9760)
posted 2 minutes ago
Financial resources mean feck all, Brazil have consistently produced great players and they're not rich not to mention countless African players. Talent is talent you either have it or you don't
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the English are genetically deficient?
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Talent and genetics don't necessarily equate to the sand thing . A lot of it is cultural and unfortunately are cultural style of play needs to adapt to compete. That's why smaller balls pitches and goals are being introduced at youth level
We always blame everyone but ourselves, its time we sack the whole FA and demolish that elephant called St James Park = waste of money.
Using population stats to determine how good a country should be at football is plain stupid
on that basis, China, India, Indonesia and Pakistan should all have brilliant football teams
comment by Heads shoulders knees John Stones, knees John Stones (U9760)
posted 2 minutes ago
Talent and genetics don't necessarily equate to the sand thing . A lot of it is cultural and unfortunately are cultural style of play needs to adapt to compete. That's why smaller balls pitches and goals are being introduced at youth level
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What will smaller balls and goals accomplish, if, as you say, you either have the talent or you don't? If finances don't mean anything then why invest money into small balls and football?
Also, the whole league structure has to be overhauled;
1. Tell the ref to cut out cynical fouls and injuries by officiating according to UEFA rules.
2. Stop the discrimination of physically light players in favour of bulky bulldogs, Barkley over Wilshere is criminal.
3. Stop the culture of blame and yes, Terry and Cole are no angels, but at least they merit playing in WC.
4. Coaching has to prioritise skills over braul.
5. PL teams have to allow more than 4 players to start games not the City version of zero.
6. Stoke must be banned from the league
7. Tony Pulis needs to stop hiring 7 footers to play as wingers.
comment by palmers_spur (U8896)
posted 2 minutes ago
Using population stats to determine how good a country should be at football is plain stupid
on that basis, China, India, Indonesia and Pakistan should all have brilliant football teams
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But we know for a fact we take football more seriously than those countries, so population should be used against England to show how overwhelmingly poor we really are.
We'll playing small kids on big pitches doesn't help, smaller pitches promote possession and clinical finishing rather than just limping it froward and hitting it at a massive target
So by the OP logic, China, India, Bangladesh etc should be the worlds best teams?
comment by Spurtle2 (U1608)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by palmers_spur (U8896)
posted 2 minutes ago
Using population stats to determine how good a country should be at football is plain stupid
on that basis, China, India, Indonesia and Pakistan should all have brilliant football teams
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But we know for a fact we take football more seriously than those countries, so population should be used against England to show how overwhelmingly poor we really are.
==
They are also cricket mad in Bangladesh so should be the No.1 ranked team in the world?
India and Bangladesh those famous footballing countries!
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 52 seconds ago
comment by Spurtle2 (U1608)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by palmers_spur (U8896)
posted 2 minutes ago
Using population stats to determine how good a country should be at football is plain stupid
on that basis, China, India, Indonesia and Pakistan should all have brilliant football teams
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But we know for a fact we take football more seriously than those countries, so population should be used against England to show how overwhelmingly poor we really are.
==
They are also cricket mad in Bangladesh so should be the No.1 ranked team in the world?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They're a lot better at cricket than football. I don't watch a lot of cricket but I'm guessing they might be better than us at it given our recent results. Probably give us a run for our money in the football too.
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Spurtle2 (U1608)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by palmers_spur (U8896)
posted 2 minutes ago
Using population stats to determine how good a country should be at football is plain stupid
on that basis, China, India, Indonesia and Pakistan should all have brilliant football teams
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But we know for a fact we take football more seriously than those countries, so population should be used against England to show how overwhelmingly poor we really are.
==
They are also cricket mad in Bangladesh so should be the No.1 ranked team in the world?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Erm, not India with a population of over a billion?
Sign in if you want to comment
Uruguay 6m population, England 70m
Page 1 of 2
posted on 20/6/14
There aren't even 70m people in the UK never mind England
posted on 20/6/14
England's population is 53 million not 70
posted on 20/6/14
Uruguays population is about half that. About 1/15th that of England.won twice as many world cups too. At some point the English will realise that their not really that good when it comes to international football
posted on 20/6/14
53 million is still embarrassing.
posted on 20/6/14
Not as embarrassing as china
posted on 20/6/14
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 20/6/14
China has no footballing pedigree compared to mighty Engerland.
posted on 20/6/14
What population do we have to get to before we can produce a world class player? So Uruguay only need 6 million to produce 2 world class players. We're at 53 million and still can't produce one.
posted on 20/6/14
This doesn't even take into account our financial resources which are probably more important than the population difference.
posted on 20/6/14
It's only a matter of time before China overtake England on the world stage.
posted on 20/6/14
Financial resources mean feck all, Brazil have consistently produced great players and they're not rich not to mention countless African players. Talent is talent you either have it or you don't
posted on 20/6/14
comment by Heads shoulders knees John Stones, knees John Stones (U9760)
posted 2 minutes ago
Financial resources mean feck all, Brazil have consistently produced great players and they're not rich not to mention countless African players. Talent is talent you either have it or you don't
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the English are genetically deficient?
posted on 20/6/14
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 20/6/14
Talent and genetics don't necessarily equate to the sand thing . A lot of it is cultural and unfortunately are cultural style of play needs to adapt to compete. That's why smaller balls pitches and goals are being introduced at youth level
posted on 20/6/14
We always blame everyone but ourselves, its time we sack the whole FA and demolish that elephant called St James Park = waste of money.
posted on 20/6/14
Using population stats to determine how good a country should be at football is plain stupid
on that basis, China, India, Indonesia and Pakistan should all have brilliant football teams
posted on 20/6/14
comment by Heads shoulders knees John Stones, knees John Stones (U9760)
posted 2 minutes ago
Talent and genetics don't necessarily equate to the sand thing . A lot of it is cultural and unfortunately are cultural style of play needs to adapt to compete. That's why smaller balls pitches and goals are being introduced at youth level
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What will smaller balls and goals accomplish, if, as you say, you either have the talent or you don't? If finances don't mean anything then why invest money into small balls and football?
posted on 20/6/14
Also, the whole league structure has to be overhauled;
1. Tell the ref to cut out cynical fouls and injuries by officiating according to UEFA rules.
2. Stop the discrimination of physically light players in favour of bulky bulldogs, Barkley over Wilshere is criminal.
3. Stop the culture of blame and yes, Terry and Cole are no angels, but at least they merit playing in WC.
4. Coaching has to prioritise skills over braul.
5. PL teams have to allow more than 4 players to start games not the City version of zero.
6. Stoke must be banned from the league
7. Tony Pulis needs to stop hiring 7 footers to play as wingers.
posted on 20/6/14
comment by palmers_spur (U8896)
posted 2 minutes ago
Using population stats to determine how good a country should be at football is plain stupid
on that basis, China, India, Indonesia and Pakistan should all have brilliant football teams
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But we know for a fact we take football more seriously than those countries, so population should be used against England to show how overwhelmingly poor we really are.
posted on 20/6/14
We'll playing small kids on big pitches doesn't help, smaller pitches promote possession and clinical finishing rather than just limping it froward and hitting it at a massive target
posted on 20/6/14
So by the OP logic, China, India, Bangladesh etc should be the worlds best teams?
posted on 20/6/14
comment by Spurtle2 (U1608)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by palmers_spur (U8896)
posted 2 minutes ago
Using population stats to determine how good a country should be at football is plain stupid
on that basis, China, India, Indonesia and Pakistan should all have brilliant football teams
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But we know for a fact we take football more seriously than those countries, so population should be used against England to show how overwhelmingly poor we really are.
==
They are also cricket mad in Bangladesh so should be the No.1 ranked team in the world?
posted on 20/6/14
India and Bangladesh those famous footballing countries!
posted on 20/6/14
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 52 seconds ago
comment by Spurtle2 (U1608)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by palmers_spur (U8896)
posted 2 minutes ago
Using population stats to determine how good a country should be at football is plain stupid
on that basis, China, India, Indonesia and Pakistan should all have brilliant football teams
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But we know for a fact we take football more seriously than those countries, so population should be used against England to show how overwhelmingly poor we really are.
==
They are also cricket mad in Bangladesh so should be the No.1 ranked team in the world?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They're a lot better at cricket than football. I don't watch a lot of cricket but I'm guessing they might be better than us at it given our recent results. Probably give us a run for our money in the football too.
posted on 20/6/14
comment by Arouna Jagielka oooh I wanna take ya, Heitinga Nikica come on pretty mama (U1308)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Spurtle2 (U1608)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by palmers_spur (U8896)
posted 2 minutes ago
Using population stats to determine how good a country should be at football is plain stupid
on that basis, China, India, Indonesia and Pakistan should all have brilliant football teams
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But we know for a fact we take football more seriously than those countries, so population should be used against England to show how overwhelmingly poor we really are.
==
They are also cricket mad in Bangladesh so should be the No.1 ranked team in the world?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Erm, not India with a population of over a billion?
Page 1 of 2