It’s nearly that time again. When the great and the good (supposedly) of world football gather together to honour the world’s best player.
At least that’s how things are supposed to be when we talk about the Ballon d’Or.
Those within football and the supporters who watch it are all savvy enough to know which player has been the best over the period for which the voting covers.
In some years it hasn’t even been close, with Sport360 noting that the 2011 award was won by Lionel Messi with a whopping 47.88 percent.
Voting anomalies, including in 2013 when journalist, Francesc Aguilar, suggested a FIFA conspiracy to benefit Cristiano Ronaldo, per ESPN, however, have tainted the award in recent years.
MORE: Liverpool’s crucial injury boost
One could argue that in the grand scheme of things, winning individual awards doesn’t really matter.
However, the cachet of being the ‘world’s best’ and the kudos bestowed upon the winner would suggest otherwise.
There are still some decisions made by the governing body that make a mockery of the award, however.
Take Chelsea’s Mason Mount being added as a candidate. It’s quite ridiculous. He wasn’t even the best player in his Chelsea team, so how on earth can he be considered amongst the best in the world?
The only basis for the award to be given is by definable metrics or stats.
Most goals/assists, completed passes, duels won… those and many others should be given a score, and the player with the highest overall score, by virtue of his excellence, is the winner.
Surely there is no fairer way to decide the award…
If football is merely about stats such as goals and assists, then you don’t know what football is. How about team players that always do the dirty job and help others to play better. Chelsea won UCL not because of stats or superstars but team work. They don’t even have an outstanding goal scorer but they win as a team.