According to a study by the Brazilian FA, 1,086 Brazilian footballers moved abroad in 2007, up from 851 in the previous year.

Stop for a minute. Think what those numbers mean. Brazil has a population of 183 million to England’s 51 million. Imagine if England lost a similar proportion of players – 302 in 2007, 237 in 2006 - over the past two years. Who would be left to play football, given that, youth players and reserves included, there are no more than 300 Englishmen in the Barclays Premier League?

Over the past six years a staggering 5,121 professional footballers have left Brazil. Some have returned, but the number is extraordinary. By some estimates, football accounts for 4.8 per cent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product, which is the tenth largest in the world.

Of course, Brazilian footballers end up all over the globe, from Syria to New Zealand, Singapore to South Africa. The majority – perhaps unsurprisingly – end up in Portugal (227 last year alone), taking advantage of the historical ties between the nations and relaxed immigration laws.

In economic terms, Brazil is at once China (a manufacturing juggernaut flooding the market with cheap products) and Switzerland (a highly specialised economy making coveted luxury goods).

The circumstances that allow Brazil to produce more talent than anywhere else in the world are well documented. It is a large, football-mad nation where everybody plays, at least to some degree. What is more, it has deep-rooted coaching traditions and knowhow, particularly when it comes to working with children. Indeed, one of the silliest myths around is that Brazil’s footballing talent stems from street children chasing beat-up footballs in shanty towns and that all you have to do is to take one of them to have a ready-made junior Kaká or Ronaldinho.

In fact, while many may have started playing football on the streets, most successful Brazilian professionals come through the highly competitive ranks of youth football. It is a cut-throat world where children as young as 10 have agents, where the annual peneiras (trials) foster a dog-eat-dog atmosphere and where bigger clubs such as Flamengo boast 50 academies across the country, bringing the total of youngsters on their books to more than 3,000.

Contrary to stereotype, most of these children develop in an environment that is far more regimented and professional – at least at a young age – than their counterparts in Europe. And they receive a footballing education, in terms of coaching, that is on a par with what you might find in the Old World.

Climate is another favourable factor, one that allows much of the country to play year-round. Brazil’s genetic make-up – a melting pot of Europeans, Africans and South Americans – also plays a part in producing exceptional athletes at the top end of the scale, at least according to some scientists. Then there are the socio-economic reasons. Brazil retains a strong income inequality while offering relatively little social mobility, which means that football (or music) is often the quickest way up for those blessed with talent.

Then there is sheer size. Brazil’s population is roughly equal to that of England, Portugal, Italy and France combined. How does the talent produced by that quartet of footballing nations compare with Brazil? Make your own list and compare. Are Kaká, Ronaldinho, Diego, Elano and Daniel Alves superior to Cristiano Ronaldo, Franc-esco Totti, Wayne Rooney, Thierry Henry and Steven Gerrard? You may find that there is not much disparity in terms of numbers and quality.

Perhaps that leads us to a satisfying conclusion. Europe has an edge over Brazil in money and infrastructure, but that is offset by Brazil’s advantage in terms of the socio-economic conditions that produce footballers. Brazil may have an edge when it comes to climate and genetic make-up (although that is rapidly changing as well).

In terms of coaching, tradition, knowhow and love of the game, it is a dead heat. So where is the real difference? Size. As long as the other variables are equal – or at least comparable – sheer numbers produce more quality.

Blatter flexes muscles

Sepp Blatter, the Fifa president, added his voice to the chorus of dissent against the Premier League’s plan to play ten matches abroad starting in January 2011. Blatter reminded everyone that any such plan needs the approval of Fifa and the football association of the nation organising the event and hinted that he is ready to intervene.

What he did not mention is that Fifa has allowed competitive matches on foreign soil before. In 1993 the Italian Super Cup (the equivalent of the Community Shield) was held in Washington DC and, in 2002, in Tripoli, Libya.

Furthermore, in many of the countries cited as possible hosts (the United States, China, Japan, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand) there is no domestic football played in late January, when the proposed fixtures would be taking place, undermining the argument that they would detract from the domestic game.

Shehata’s proud record

In 2006, Hassan Shehata managed Egypt to victory in the African Cup of Nations, making some painful choices along the way, such as dropping Mido, the star striker. On this occasion, there was less controversy as his team won the tournament for a record sixth time after a 1-0 victory over Cameroon yesterday. At a time when most African countries look to foreign managers for a quick fix, Shehata’s longevity suggests that there is quality nearer to home.