Is Ballon d’Or objective?

[Reatim]

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?

[Die_empty]

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?

There can never be a perfect way of selecting the best player because there will always be defects or errors in the process. The question should be how are these journalists selected. Are different countries or continents represented objectively in the population of 100 journalists? If you select 70 voters from Europe and spread others to another continent, racial bias will make any European candidate win.

The Ballon d’Or has always faced backlash from people who think the process is not transparent. This issue with Vinicius Junior is not the first. There were agitations when Robert Lewendoski and Ering Haaland were not awarded, but from my observation, the process has been objective.

However, there is still room for improvement like reviewing the criteria for choosing the journalist that will vote. These voters should also be kept secret to avoid influence from the nominees.

[Gozie51]

How objective is this award and is this deciding method really the best?

Well since you don't want to discuss whether Rodiri deserve it more than vinicius, I think the objective is to showcase the best out of the best players and it is worth it for different reasons especially to give rewards for the sport participants. But in my view, I don't really think that just one person can be the best for every season because the selection can also be corrupted as many have also alleged. For instance, those journalist can be subjective to favour a particular player from their continent which is the reason that some people believe it is still a biase system. I have known some gamblers who believed that vinicius should have gone home with it while others argued to favour Rodiri and such argument didn't start today.

[danherbias07]

It's possible that a biased decision happened and also other reason behind it.

Not about football but I believe it also happened in different sports. Basketball for example, Nikola Jokic was snatched with an opportunity to make a record of a 3-time NBA MVP which will put his name among the popular names of the league history.
It's also the media who made the vote and I sincerely believe that Jokic won that award for the 3rd time but in my own opinion, they didn't let that happen because it might ruin the sport or maybe there's some racism there too. The records tell that he won that award but because everything relies on a voting system, it won't even matter if you have the better stats than the other guy.

[Yucky]

There is no perfect method, whether it's for the Ballon d'Or or other Best Player awards. There must be little bias—as long as human beings are handling this system—but I believe that the system strives for objectivity to a certain extent because they know the whole world is watching. And as you can see, the top players are exceptional, so choosing the best of the best is never an easy decision.

It's not like they brought a player who barely has any records to crown as Ballon d'Or; every player who was nominated is an outstanding player. It's also very natural that if you find yourself in that spot, you will be patriotic to either your country or to a player with whom you have a personal relationship. The judges just try their best not to show it so that the fans will not notice and bring it to the media. But in general, the system is striving for objective decisions.

[swogerino]

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?

For me the Ballon D'or is not objectively chosen but subjectively chosen by some of sports journalists if I am not mistaken. This means that is not an objective for many players although it is a very nice to have for many of them. I also don't think that it impacts the salary of any player, if the player is good he will get good offers and also if he is not that good but the journalists have given him the prize here he will not get higher salary compared to what he deserves. It is just a so called "prestigious prize" and nothing more.

[stompix]

Is it possible that these journalists may be affected by some personal bias or patriotism?

Messi won that 8 times and Ronaldo 5 times, it wasn't patriotism then?
There are one hundred journalists from 100 countries around the world, how would that be patriotism?
And if we talk about that Spain representative voted for Vini not Rodri, so stop with the conspiracies.

Vini lost because he has a garbage attitude on the field, that's why , they couldn't simply give him the title when there is no match where he doesn't quarrel with the referee the other players and so on!

[HajiBagi]

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?

Balloon Dior has lost it credibility, when Ronaldo said that in 2021 no one believe but now we have all understand, you said you don't want to hear about if the person they give the Award deserve or not but we are talking about something that a person deserve and that means a name must be mention, Rodri is a good player and no one can deny it but we know who deserve it, Balloon Dior has lost it credibility that no any players will even be happy if he win it or not because even if you deserve it and the FIFA don't like you they will not give you the Award.

Talking about the journalist, is it the journalist that is voting for the Balloon Dior or the players? The Balloon Dior voting that I know is a voting that players use to do, if it was journalist then many people who have won it before will never win it because there are some Balloon Dior that journalist prefer and they did not give it to who deserve it, No one can deceive me that Balloon Dior voting is made by journalist, is all lie, FIFA just want to find a way to deceive people so that they won't judge them, Even Champion League has value than Balloon Dior currently.

[Plaguedeath]

Of course it's completely possible these journalists voted the players they like, it's why Messi can won Ballon d'Or eight times!

Ballon d'Or is subjective, it was never been objective, but we, as Average Joe can't do anything. However, it's hard to get objective results in this kind reward, there's always a way to bribe the voters.

Balloon Dior has lost it credibility

You mean this one?

[blomen]

The Ballon d'Or is definitely the best individual award you can win right now. No one can argue about that. Was Vinicius Jr. the best player in the Champions League? Who cares? This year, Rodri won the Ballon d'Or. There may be awards that have the potential to replace the Ballon d'Or, but all players, fans, and everyone interested in football cares the most about the Ballon d'Or. No matter who receives it, and no matter how objective it is, there will always be debates. That's what creates its advertising value, after all.

People will always argue. Even in seasons where the winner is the most clear-cut, we still see debates. If Vini Jr. had won, there would have been millions objecting to it. This is exactly why people look forward to the Ballon d'Or each year. We could create a simple ‘Bitcoind'Or’ based purely on statistics — goals, assists, and trophies — and determine the winners for all seasons in just one minute. But if we did that, would the award really have any meaning? That's what I mean.

[Popkon6]

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?

Usually the Ballon d'Or selection is based on the whole game, but Vinicius Jr. was supported by many but not by the judges and journalists. But I think no one can be 100% correct in selecting it, because there can be errors here. Because when the Ballon d'Or was announced, many fans of Vinicius Jr. clamored for many movements and names. But in comparison Rodri deserves it, because he is a worthy player and the judges have declared it a worthy player. A player who has been awarded as much by the judges as he deserves, I think Vinicius Jr should not have won the Ballon d'Or because he did not perform well at the World Cup.

[Blowon]

I see no influence from journalists, the award was given because Ronaldo's skills are above average, this is just my personal opinion, I'm not a fan of Ronaldo but I think he deserves an award for the skills he has

[Rockstarguy]

Is it possible that these journalists may be affected by some personal bias or patriotism?

Vini lost because he has a garbage attitude on the field, that's why , they couldn't simply give him the title when there is no match where he doesn't quarrel with the referee the other players and so on!

This is even what I'm thinking could be the reason why Vini wasn't picked, well we can't really tell what could be the exact reason because I believe Vini is also a very good player that many were expecting to win Ballon d'Or. Since the winner was determined by 100 journalists, I think maybe it was done by voting which he wasn't lucky to be the winner. Something is wrong somewhere that is why there is an outcome like this, Ballon d'Or in previous years is totally different from this very one.

It needs to be transparent to avoid questioning from people. Vini may have terrible attitude but I don't think it is a good reason not to get Ballon d'Or because that dude is very skilled.

[m2017]

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?

Any award is subjective, because the decision to award a candidate is made by judges based on their personal subjective opinion. Of course, the opinion of each judge can be influenced by many factors: bias, corruption, and anything else. In recent years, the Golden Ball has become an analogue of the Oscar, when they award not the best, but the most needed, from the point of view of the SJW popularity. Remember when the Golden Balls were received by Ronaldo and Messi - the most media and hyped football players. But since the Golden Ball is awarded for sporting merits, then the most effective (from an individual point of view) athletes should be awarded. This year, many are inclined to believe that this award has returned to its roots and was awarded based on objective assessment. Rodiri's indicators turned out to be better than Vini's, not to mention all sorts of Messi and Ronaldo.

[Yaunfitda]

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?

Voting method is not to be objective because they are going to votes based on who they wanted to win, and it's based on personal biases. And I think this also happens in the other sports such as NBA.

There are cases that they win the MVP award but it's not unanimously, meaning at least 1 member of the journalist didn't vote for them. And it's obvious, that they really don't like the player or they have something in their mind that they think deserves it based on their biases.

[Docnaster]

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?

Just like you rightly said, the Balon D'or award ceremony was held on Monday night and surprisingly, Manchester City and Spain midfielder Rodri was named as the winner and that has sparked several opinions from football experts, legends, veteran journalists and most of their views have been pointing to the fact that the most deserving of the award this year wasn't the player that was named. The majority of these views I think gives answer to the question you asked which is that the award is a mere subjective opinion of the organizers and doesn't necessarily reflect to the reality of who truly is the best footballer on the planet.

[Stablexcoin]

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?

Before any manipulation can be possible there must be an amount for the bribe. Now, you need to calculate first how much the winner gets or how high the reward for winning the Ballon D Or that someone would want to perpetuate their way to winning the award. Then calculate that amount to 100 Journalists. What am saying in essence is that it will be difficult to manipulate all 100 Journalist. So I think the decision of the Journalist is fair. The method is better because they are not football representatives, they are more of the people's friends. The Jounralist are the people who keeps proper statistics of each player in the league or nominated.

[Fiatless]

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?

Before any manipulation can be possible there must be an amount for the bribe. Now, you need to calculate first how much the winner gets or how high the reward for winning the Ballon D Or that someone would want to perpetuate their way to winning the award. Then calculate that amount to 100 Journalists. What am saying in essence is that it will be difficult to manipulate all 100 Journalist. So I think the decision of the Journalist is fair. The method is better because they are not football representatives, they are more of the people's friends. The Jounralist are the people who keeps proper statistics of each player in the league or nominated.

Wining the 2024 Ballon d'Or is a priceless accomplishment. Players might be willing to give out a fortune to buy it if it has a price. Winning the award puts the player in the books of history as one of the greatest. The award could also bring more lucrative endorsement deals to the player which might even exceed the financial benefit the award offers. In summary, I think a desperate player will be willing to bribe all the journalists just to have the award but this is impossible because many of them cannot be bribed.

[Oshosondy]

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?

There can still be biases if the journalists involved are not many but while selecting if it is 100 journalists that choose 10 plays each and which is used to make the final conclusion of who the best player is, I think it is good like that. No need to think about biases in this way. I think it is perfect this way.

[Stablexcoin]

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?

Before any manipulation can be possible there must be an amount for the bribe. Now, you need to calculate first how much the winner gets or how high the reward for winning the Ballon D Or that someone would want to perpetuate their way to winning the award. Then calculate that amount to 100 Journalists. What am saying in essence is that it will be difficult to manipulate all 100 Journalist. So I think the decision of the Journalist is fair. The method is better because they are not football representatives, they are more of the people's friends. The Jounralist are the people who keeps proper statistics of each player in the league or nominated.

Wining the 2024 Ballon d'Or is a priceless accomplishment. Players might be willing to give out a fortune to buy it if it has a price. Winning the award puts the player in the books of history as one of the greatest. The award could also bring more lucrative endorsement deals to the player which might even exceed the financial benefit the award offers. In summary, I think a desperate player will be willing to bribe all the journalists just to have the award but this is impossible because many of them cannot be bribed.

Do you mean that a desperate player will be willing to pay any amount to get the Ballon d'Or award even if it is the entire savings he has in his life? And what is the probability that he will get it after bribing it? Mehn that kind of risk is at the top of gambling. What I can think of as a possibility is the fact that the official might have someone who they support and give it to him. Apart from that, no player can be able to bribe their way into winning the Ballon d'Or award because they cant afford it.