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?
Anything that is widely condemned should be deemed faulty most times, the criticism of this Ballon d'Or's winner is too loud this time and it is disgraceful, to say the least. This is why some people do not appreciate some titles anymore because the holders may not deserve it, so what is the point? The present jury guys are the most unpredictable I've ever known since I've been following football. This is not about people's sentiment but what is obvious in the sight of the majority. FIFA and the so-called panel/jury are now sentimental and political, they don't appreciate true talent again, that is what I can say right now. This is not the first time the deserving player has been robbed, even Messi was not worth the last one he won. It's all about humans pleasing themselves which is not fair.