In light of recent events, this got me curious.
We know that Ballon d’Or was recently held and they have decided to crown Rodiri as the winner. Now, I don’t want to hear whether he deserved it or not or should it have been vini. This post is not to discuss that but, I want to know if this award really is objective and reflective of the best performing athlete in terms of football.
We are always curious about how the winner of Ballon d’Or determined.
It is very difficult to be objective since it is determined by journalist who basically aren't the person who understands deeply the nature of football. I guess it is all about the popularity of the player. Or where the player comes from.
It has been said that the winner is decided by 100 journalists each picking their top 10 players of the year. Is it possible that these journalists may be affected by some personal bias or patriotism? How objective is this award and is this deciding method really the best?
It is very possible. I know what you mean, the journalist may pick the best players based on the country. For example: the journalist from Spain probably prefer choosing the players from Spain. This is something very possible to happen, that's why it is difficult to accept the winner of Ballon d'Or. Especially the winner in this year, there was a rumor that Vinicius was the winner but it suddenly changed when it was nearing the day of announcing the winner.