Question: When dealing with Euclidean vector spaces (such as those in physics) we consider that a vector $A$ with a tuple of scalar components $(a,b,c)$ is equal to a vector $B$ with the same components, however, we make a distinction between column and row vectors (namely that one is the transpose of the other) is it that for a euclidean vector we just decide on one way of 'representation' and the distinction is more for dealing with matrices? Because this suggests that given a row vector $A$ and Column vector $B$ with the same components they are not equal. Is it a form of notation for vectors or are we essentially writing the components in a matrix?

If we define a vector $a=(a\_1,a\_2)$ as being represented as a column and row vector, then for $a$, $Ma≠Ma$ as one is defined and the other is not.

Answer: 
You are confusing notation and coordinate representation of vectors. That is, a vector space is an algebraic structure defined using four objects $(V, \mathbb{F}, \oplus ,\odot )$ where $(V, \oplus)$ is an Abelian group, $(\mathbb{F},+,\cdot )$ is a field and

$$
\odot :\mathbb{F}\times V\to V,\quad (\lambda ,\mathbf{v})\mapsto \lambda \odot \mathbf{v}
$$

is a function named scalar multiplication, such that the following conditions holds:

$$
\lambda \odot (\mathbf{v}\oplus \mathbf{w})=(\lambda \odot \mathbf{v})\oplus (\lambda \odot \mathbf{w}),\quad 1\odot \mathbf{v}=\mathbf{v},\quad 0\odot \mathbf{v}=\mathbf 0
\\(\lambda +\mu)\odot \mathbf{v}=(\lambda \odot \mathbf{v})\oplus (\mu \odot \mathbf{v}),\quad (\lambda \cdot \mu )\odot \mathbf{v}=\lambda \odot (\mu \odot \mathbf{v})
$$

If the vector space have finite dimension (say dimension $n$), then there exists some list of linear independent vectors $\mathbf{v}\_1,\ldots ,\mathbf{v}\_n$ such that for every $\mathbf{w}\in V$ there exists scalars $\lambda \_j\in \mathbb{F}$ such that

$$
\mathbf{w}=(\lambda \_1\odot \mathbf{v}\_1)\oplus \ldots \oplus (\lambda \_n\odot \mathbf{v}\_n)
$$

Then, using the previous list as a basis of $V$ we can represent the vector $\mathbf{w}$ as $(\lambda \_1,\ldots ,\lambda \_n)$, that is, there is a bijective map $\phi :V\to \mathbb{F}^n$ such that to each vector in $V$ gives a coordinate representation $(\lambda \_1,\ldots ,\lambda \_n)$, what is an element of $\mathbb{F}^n$.

So, for any Euclidean space $V$ of dimension $n$ we directly use the coordinate representation given by elements of $\mathbb{R}^n$. Now, as a notation we can represent any element of $\mathbb{R}^n$ by the standard notation for $n$-tuples, that is $(\lambda \_1,\ldots ,\lambda \_n)$, or using a matrix-like vertical notation

$$\begin{pmatrix}
\lambda \_1\\ \vdots \\ \lambda \_n
\end{pmatrix}$$

However both notations represent the same vector $\mathbf{w}\in V$, but we choose some or other notation depending on the context to make things easier, by example if $M$ is an $n\times n$ matrix then we choose the vertical notation to represent the action of $M$ by the left to some vector, in this case

$$
\begin{pmatrix}
M\_{1,1}&&\cdots &&M\_{1,n}\\\vdots && &&\vdots \\M\_{n,1}&&\cdots && M\_{n,n}
\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}
\lambda \_1\\ \vdots \\ \lambda \_n
\end{pmatrix}
$$

However, to write the coordinates of $\mathbf{w}$ inside a text is preferable to use the notation $(\lambda \_1,\ldots ,\lambda \_n)$ instead. I hope you see it more clear now.
The answers above already well clarify that there is an isomorphism
between lists (n-uples), row vectors and column vectorsand thus the choice is a matter of convenience.

In linear algebra the column notation is more common because more conforming to the way we write
systems of linear equations.  

Instead the row notation is common practice in Markov chains just because the matrix then looks tha same as
the usual representation of a transition matrix as row $\to$ column.

But interestingly, since you are studying physics, later on you will face with the important concept of
[co-variant and contra-variant](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covariance_and_contravariance_of_vectors) vectors,
dealing with which is useful to use both conventions together, while keeping them distinct.