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?
Generally, this sometimes does not naturally represent the opinion of the majority, fast fast forward back to 2010 Ballon d'Or winners, Wesley sneijder were no way the winner, A good systems should be deployed in other to get the true reflection of what supporters and fans of this players view or choice. If things should go this way henceforth, it means the objective is gradually changing ,because regardless of people having different views on player of choice, if a good system of voting is in place, it will definitely reflect the mass true choice.