Did Cristiano Ronaldo deserve to be the best world player of the year 2014?
FIFA’s recent award of the 2014 Ballon d’Or (World Player of the Year) to Cristiano Ronaldo shows that the accolade has more to do with politics and personal popularity than performance on the pitch.
Although players of various nationalities are nominated and win the award, they always all play for European clubs, while those active in other leagues, such as in South America and Mexico, are usually overlooked. The best player is chosen by players and managers based on favoritism rather than merit, often creating unworthy winners. Thus, the award has lost its recognition and has become the object of ridicule and ridicule.
The Ballon d’Or was established by a magazine called France Football in 1956 to recognize the creators of the game’s history. But that is not what it has turned out to be.
THE LEAGUE
Between January 1 and December 31, 2014 in this competition, Lionel Messi scored 35 goals in 36 games (11 with the right, 23 with the left and one header) while Cristiano Ronaldo scored 38 goals with less versatility since only 4 were with the head and the left foot unfavorable.
In addition, Messi created 97 chances, 24 more than any other player, and completed 164 dribbles, 63 more than Atlético Bilbao’s closest rival Iker Muniain (MAILOnline – Why Lionel Messi should win the Ballon d’Or after a record year with Barcelona; by Kieran Gill, January 12, 2015).
EUROPE
Messi conquered the continent on November 25 when he became the all-time top scorer in the Champions League in Nicosia, Cyprus. He was his 23rd European city, his 16th European country and he recorded the 24th different stadium he had scored in (MAILOnline etc.)
WORLD CUP 2014
In football’s biggest competition, Messi led Argentina to the final, was voted Man of the Match in 4 games (the most of any player in the competition), and won the Golden Boot as the tournament’s best player.
It had the biggest impact on the competition. His goals were all game-winning goals that propelled Argentina to the final. He was the joint third-highest goalscorer with 4 goals and 1 assist, created the most chances, had the most successful dribbling runs, made the most deliveries into the box, and produced the most through balls of any player.
In contrast, Ronaldo was not a factor and only scored a late goal against little Ghana and had an assist against the USA.
STORY CREATOR
Messi’s performance in 2014 was what the Ballon d’Or is all about, that is, historic performances. On March 16 he became Barcelona’s all-time top scorer (371). A week later he became the top scorer in El Clásico (matches between Real Madrid and Barcelona) (21) with a hat-trick.
He scored his 400th career goal on 27 September against Granada and surpassed a 59-year-old record to become LaLiga’s all-time top scorer (253) on 22 November. Three days later he surpassed Raúl to score a hat-trick to become the top scorer in Champions League history (74).
Given all these achievements, one would think that of the three nominees Messi was the one who served the most to win the award. Instead, not only did he lose to Ronaldo, but he and the other nominee, Manuel Neuer, got fewer votes combined (31.48%) than Ronaldo (37.66%).
In 2013 Ronaldo won nothing and Franck Ribery won everything but Ronaldo still beat him.
How can all this be explained?
POLITICS BEHIND THE VOTE
FIFA criteria require national coaches, captains and press officers to vote for the most outstanding player of the past twelve months.
It is not surprising that players vote for their teammates and compatriots. In the 2014 contest, for example, Bastian Schweinsteiger (Germany) awarded all three places to Germans Manuel Neuer, Phillip Lahm and Thomas Muller.
Diego Godín (Atlético de Madrid) voted for his former teammates Diego Costa and Thibaut Courtois.
Vincent Kompany (Belgium) voted for his teammates Thibaut Courtois and Eden Hazard as the two best players in the world with Arjen Robben third.
The best example of politics in all this is illustrated by Robert Lewandowski (Bayern Munich) who declared without giving reason that he regretted having voted for Ronaldo instead of his teammate Neuer. This ‘change of heart’ can only be explained as coming from a player wanting to save face with his teammates in the locker room rather than a vote with any real conviction.
The same criticism applies to managers who only vote for national players. For example, Argentina coach Gerardo Martino gave all three places to his compatriots, namely Lionel Messi, Angel di Maria and Javier Mascherano, Belgium coach Marc Wilmots voted for Belgian Thibaut Courtous for the third place, Didier Deschamps (France) gave the final place to French striker Benzema and Dutchman Guus Hiddink gave the top honor to his compatriot Arjen Robben.
Players will get a lot of votes if they are popular ‘with the boys’ and can play in front of cameras to advertise commercial products. Those who defend Ronaldo’s choice as the best player point out that in the second half of 2014 he scored 32 goals. The problem is that 9 of those goals were from penalties, so his goals without a penalty were 23, the same amount as Messi who did not have a penalty. Ronaldo is nicknamed “Penaldo” due to his mastery at drawing and scoring penalties.
In a World Cup year like 2014, your performance in that tournament is what defines you. On the biggest stage in the world, Ronaldo was not a factor and his supporters excuse him by saying that he was injured. If that is true, he is unlucky, but the injury is a disgrace, not a privilege, and he can only be judged on his actual performance and not on speculation about what he might have accomplished had he been in top form. .
The Player of the Year award has lost its authenticity. But it does not have to be like that. It is not a personality contest or school dance. It is supposed to recognize performance on the field. Perhaps FIFA officials should become judges, give non-European clubs more consideration and use criteria such as achievement and fair play to pick the winner. This would not be a perfect system, but it would be preferable to the current one, which is deeply flawed and cannot be taken seriously.
Victor A. Dixon
January 18, 2015