The Duality of Soccer Awards: Balancing Prestige and Inclusivity
Soccer, undeniably, is a sport where results are determined on the pitch, and the most coveted achievements are those like the FIFA World Cup and UEFA Champions League. However, as the year draws to a close, various organizations take the opportunity to honor players through differing awards, leading to a competitive landscape highlighted by two main awards: the Ballon d’Or and FIFA’s The Best award. Since their inception in 2017, these awards embody disparate philosophies regarding the evaluation of players, presenting a clash at the heart of soccer’s recognition system.
The Ballon d’Or, organized by UEFA and France Football, employs a selection process predominantly driven by journalists, with 100 representatives from the top 100 ranked soccer nations casting votes—of which about 40% are from Europe. In contrast, The Best FIFA Men’s Player award boasts a more democratic framework, aggregating votes from national team captains, coaches, journalists, and a global public vote, thus engaging a wider audience and reflecting a more global view of the sport. Both awards, however, rely on shortlists that significantly influence who gets nominated, often revealing underlying biases in their selection processes.
The disparity in nominations is most notable when examining the types of players included on the shortlists. FIFA’s panel tends to draw from a broader pool of talent, featuring players from leagues outside Europe, while the Ballon d’Or remains largely Eurocentric. This year, for instance, Lionel Messi from Inter Miami made The Best shortlist amid a backdrop where talents competing primarily in other leagues are becoming increasingly recognized. This illustrates a shift in the soccer landscape where the best players might not necessarily align with traditional European clubs, as seen with legends Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo, who now ply their trade outside UEFA competitions.
However, the selection processes have their drawbacks. For instance, the FIFA Best awards have occasionally been criticized for being overly inclusive. Notably, the omission of prominent players like Mohamed Salah raised eyebrows, especially given that the shortlist included entrants who may not have had a standout season but excelled in national tournaments. This inconsistency highlights the challenges FIFA faces in balancing inclusivity with the recognition of genuine excellence, as evidenced by nominees such as Luciano Acosta, who didn’t exhibit impressive club form but was recognized for his contributions to MLS.
Recognizing the thin line that separates inclusivity from dilution of prestige, sports writer William Bi sheds light on alternative awarding approaches to counteract the Eurocentric bias of traditional accolades. His organization of the Best Footballer in Asia award in 2013 demonstrated how providing a platform for deserving players outside Europe could enhance the global recognition of talent, signaling the growing importance of integrating global perspectives in assessing soccer excellence.
Ultimately, while subjective opinions will always influence player evaluations, the awards serve as a reminder of the achievements players earn through teamwork and individual brilliance. The debate surrounding who deserves to be celebrated—or the merits of being celebrated in different contexts—may be ongoing. Yet, what remains irrefutable is that accolades like the Ballon d’Or and The Best offer a moment to reflect on the shared journey of soccer, celebrating different paths to excellence while manifesting the evolving narrative of the game on a global stage.
