The Ballon d'Or - A Popularity Contest Wrapped In Gold

The Ballon d'Or is the award bestowed upon the best worldwide player of the season and is undoubtedly the most prestigious individual award a player can win. 

The award was introduced in 1956, with Blackpool's Stanley Matthews emerging as the inaugural winner. Until 1995, the award was only contested by European players before the rules were changed to incorporate other continental players who were playing in Europe. The criteria were then further extended in 2007 so that any player from around the world could win the prize. 

The criteria for the Ballon d'Or are, on paper, very simple. Players are judged on 1) Individual performances, 2) Team performances and achievements and 3) Class and fair play. The award is then decided by one journalist representative from each of the top 100 FIFA-ranked nations who vote for their top 10 players from a predetermined pool of 30 decided by publications France Football and L'Equipe. The players are awarded points for each individual ranking, with the player with the most accumulated points being crowned as the winner of The Ballon d'Or.

There has been a lot of discourse likening the Ballon d'Or to a popularity contest over the past few years, with these opinions culminating at this year's ceremony.

Ousmane Dembélé was awarded the prestigious award by a whopping 321-point difference. But that wasn't what people seemed to have an issue with. The issue seemed to be with where Raphinha placed. 

Raphinha scored 34 goals and assisted 26 times in 57 games for a Barcelona side that won the domestic treble and reached the Champions League semi-final. Yet was deemed the fifth best player in the world behind Mohamed Salah, Vitinha, Lamine Yamal and of course Dembele. 

While the players ahead of him all had phenomenal seasons, the football world was left stunned that the Brazilian could be that low and used the opportunity to highlight the lack of attention to the criteria. 

Comparatively, the football community were somewhat confused at Yamal's placing. Lamine Yamal is an incredible football player already at the age of 18 and will undoubtedly be the face of football for years to come. 

But second-best footballer on the planet last year? Highly debatable. 

The youngster scored 18 times and assisted 25 goals in 55 games, which is a great return. But in my opinion, it's not the return of the second-best footballer in the world. But just because he's flashy, exciting and new, the young man got votes. 

This isn't the first time that the more popular players have, seemingly undeservedly, ranked higher

Firstly, since 2000, only three non-forwards have won the award, with the last time a defender winning it being 2006 and the last time a goalkeeper winning it being 1963. 

In my opinion, this speaks volumes about what the Ballon d'Or is. Every position on the football field is important; goalkeepers and defenders win teams points. But because they're the spoilers and not the creators, they're not ever popular enough to win the award. 

Secondly, the accolades of the team a player plays for seem to hold an unnecessary weight in the outcome of the votes. If a team wins a high number of trophies or games, then it's often the case that, without inspection, the best player in that team is automatically given status in the rankings. While they will have obviously contributed to their team's success, it doesn't mean they're the sole purpose for it and it doesn't automatically place them as the best, or one of the best, players in the world. 

Case and point: Jorginho's third place in 2021. 

Jorginho had a fantastic 2021, winning the Champions League with Chelsea and the European Championship with Italy. But third best in the world? He wasn't even the best player in either side! It's like the voting panel saw who had played well in both winning teams and assumed he must be the best player. 

For me, the Ballon d'Or really died with Messi's 8th, and currently last, win in 2023. 

Lionel Messi is, in my opinion, the greatest player to ever live and deserves all his flowers, but he just was not better than Erling Haaland that season. 

Haaland came into the Premier League and, in his inaugural campaign, broke the goalscoring record for a season with 36 league goals in 35 appearances. It wasn't just the league he was lethal in either, as he netted 12 times in 13 Champions League appearances as his side, Manchester City, won the treble by an English club. 

Lionel Messi had a good season too, winning two trophies for PSG before his transfer to Inter Miami, where he also managed to win himself a trophy. 

Not bad, but it's not really much of a comparison, is it? 

There seemed to be no logical reason why Messi should've won that night. But it seemed that the PR surrounding Messi's World Cup win the season prior had managed to sway the voters in terms of popularity. 

Can the Ballon d'Or be legitimised once again?

I'm not here to solve FIFA's problems. But I am here to give my opinion, and my opinion is that if the Ballon d'Or is to claw some form of meaning back and finally be a trophy representative of the best player in the world, journalists can't have this much of an influence.

The nature of the voting system is geared towards being a popularity vote. Just because these people write about football doesn't mean they watch every player or every game. More importantly, it does not mean they are automatically objective. 

I think the criteria system should be at least somewhat tied to statistics. 

To immediately contradict myself, I don't believe how good a player is should be based on their statistics, as I think football is viewed with the eyes and not through a spreadsheet. With that being said, implementing in-depth statistics would at least account for every performance the player has, instead of being judged on a few big games by a panel of journalists.

The option for other influences, such as the player's team's trophies, a vote each for the shortlist of players, or bringing back the say of national captains, could also be implemented, just maybe as a secondary. 

This is not a foolproof system, and I recognise that, but it would shift the Ballon d'Or from 'Which player has the most PR?' to 'Who performed best game by game?'.