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.
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?
The reason your asking this question is because of the controversy the award has caused in the world of football, now your saying we shouldn't talk about who deserves it between Rodri and vinicius junior, when originally that has been the bone of contention, because if Vinicius junior was awarded the Balloon d'Or, nobody would have raised an eyebrow, I'm sure you yourself OP wouldn't have asked this question.
However let's go the crux of the matter, talking about the award being really objective and reflect the best performing athlete in football. Yes the award is an individual award that recognize an exceptional football player in a calendar season, from the trophies the player has won both for club sides and country, to number of goals he scored and assisted, how skilful he is and whole lot more. Over the years they award has been given to exceptional players in recognition of their contribution in the calendar season.
Well you can argue about the deciding pattern, the journalist and coaches that vote, but one thing you must always recognize the fact that UEFA always has their hand in it.