Archive for the ‘Ballon D’Or’ Category

Ben Massey, who has long made a habit of pointing out the appalling voting record in the Ballon d’Or when it comes to the finalists and eventual winner, has made some waves with an expert breakdown of the incredible voting record for the 2012 Woman Player of the Year, which went to the USA’s Abby Wambach.

The work is to be commended, but Massey hammers the conclusion home:

The Ballon d’Or is being decided, in large parts, by the sub-minnows of women’s soccer. Countries which are active once every two or four years, where women’s soccer has virtually no significance, determine what is supposed to be the highest honour in women’s soccer. People from the outskirts of women’s soccer who’ve never played against or seen any of the candidates, except maybe in one qualifier they lost 11-0, in countries where women’s soccer has no cultural standing, are accorded equal weight to the Miyamas, the Sinclairs, and the Lloyds of the world. Coaches who work with the seriousness of your average Sunday leaguer, have real jobs, and run programs that would lose to any PCSL women’s team waste votes on lousy players because they’ve heard of them. This is a systemic flaw, inherent in giving the irrelevant two-thirds an equal voice to the one-third that matters in this game.

I’ve thought a lot this week that this silly controversy about the importance of the awards could one day be mitigated with the improvement in objective player metrics. The same old patina of old school journos talking crap about player “intangibles” might remain, but the rest of us from whom comparing players need not be an endless pissing contest or a pointless fight over the aggregate opinions of otherwise unqualified “experts” might be spared the entire endeavour.

Even if that day never comes, and it probably won’t, caveat emptor on these kinds of press-awarded baubles. Michael Owen one it once, remember…

The Lead

Perhaps because the FIFA Ballon D’Or Player of the Year was a fait accompli, and the award for the Best Female Player of the Year was a total and utter sham as the vast majority of the voting nations had likely not watched 10 minutes of women’s football—let alone 90—but the FIFA/FifPro XI has drawn a lot of attention in the wake of the schmooze in Zurich yesterday.

That’s because the entire team was comprised of players from La Liga. Furthermore, of the XI only Falcao hailed from a club not named Real Madrid or Barcelona. While the usual suspects not worth wasting precious words on used it as an occasion to rail against the fact FIFA “hates the Premier League”, despite the fact the team is voted on by 50,000 professional footballers, one writer, the Guardian’s Barney Ronay, took a different tack:

Mainly there is a tragedy of disappearance here. What Fifa’s team tells us year after year is that elite football is a violently stratified affair, with attention and resources increasingly focused on the very summit of the summit. In its eight years this team has never (yes: never) featured a player from outside the Premier League, Bundesliga, La Liga and Serie A, while of 88 players selected 51 have come from Barcelona and Rea Madrid.

The same process is visible to an even greater degree in Uefa’s team of the year which as recently as 2002 could find room for Rustu Recber of Fenerbahce in goal, Christian Chivu of Ajax in defence and Damien Duff in midfield, still managed to feature two Porto players in 2004, but ever since has been dominated by the big four leagues, with just one player from the French league, one from the Dutch league, and one German-based player not from Bayern Munich in the last decade.

There is above all a sense of sadness about all this, of a global sport whose reach has never been so wide, but which is increasingly dominated by a dwindling cast of familiar institutions. Even among the elite the elite have sprung a brilliant coup here. It is to be hoped, with all due plaudits to the individual players involved, that this year will prove to be an outstanding exception rather than a vision of what is to come.

Beyond the bit where Ronay falls a bit into a trap by assuming the opinions of professional footballers are commensurate with objective, empirical fact, his point is valid. However, it deserves a little more scrutiny.

First, while Ronay does not say it outright, he implies the reason the FIFA XI is limited mostly to two clubs in the same league is because of their financial heft. It’s therefore worth looking in detail though at the career trajectory of each player.

Gerard Pique, Andres Iniesta, Xavi Hernandez, and Lionel Messi were all products of La Masia academy. Iker Casillas learned his trade with Real Madrid Castilla, Xabi Alonso with Real Sociedad’s youth team, and Sergio Ramos with Sevilla. Marcelo and Dani Alves were both scouted right out of Brazil, by Real Madrid and Sevilla respectively.

Of the entire starting eleven, only Falcao and Ronaldo came to Spain after first making their name at other, high profile European clubs as established stars. Spain, in other words, is quite good at both developing players and spotting promising young talent.

That’s a good thing for world football, not necessarily a sign of the increasing concentration of wealth. It means that other nations might try to emulate the Spanish model, a nation that as of 2010 held 23,995 UEFA coaching licenses to England’s 2,769, and one that allows its youth sides to compete in the lower leagues, thereby gaining precious, competitive first team experience at a comparatively early age. England is stumbling toward the rebirth of a player development model that in some ways reflects Spain. Other nations might follow suit.

The model is there; it’s up to various national associations to learn from it what they can.
Read the rest of this entry »

I mean, you had time to go to London for the Olympics where you wrote this cool Blogspot blog, but you couldn’t vote for the Ballon D’Or?

You too, Sheldon Longley of the Bahamas. And several others, in fact. Lazy journos. Anyway, here’s the list in which you can see how all the people voted and then make fun of them. Also, kudos to the head coaches of Senegal and Nigeria and the team captain South Africa for voting Yaya Toure in first place.

I don’t want to look at the Women’s voting list for fear of spiraling into total depression, but I’ve found out via the Twitter that Marta won more votes than Alex Morgan.

Ball of Gold Awards!

So I watched this. It started with Sepp Blatter saying players should stay on the pitch to suffer racist abuse because of Afghanistan or something, then there were some Brazilian Capoeira dancers who had no shirts and kicked the air for a while. A long time you might say.

Then Ronaldo (the fat, good one) started talking about infrastructure. Then a dancing stuffed Armadillo came out. Ronaldo kissed it, and Jarome Valcke said it represented the importance of nature of something, then he said it was cute and put his arm around it.

Then at that point, I noticed Kay Murray’s dress was pretty kick-ass.

Then we saw a cool montage of old players scoring goals, which was great because it reminded me this whole thing was about football. Actually, this was easily the best part of the entire night.

Then they announced the FIFA XI, which was basically the Spain/Barca starting XI with some Real Madrid chunks and Falcao. FIFA pretty much hates England and the Premier League. Ronaldo told a child that to be as good as him he just had to work hard and be humble. Magic.

Then Pia Sundahge won the FIFA Womens Coach of the Year, and she wore a shirt that had words on it, and she sang some country song, which WASN’T AWKWARD AT ALL. Then Ronaldo’s special montage aired, in which he was referred to as a “weakling” as a 7-year old by someone, which I hope wasn’t his father.

At that point Blatter talked for too long and gave an award to a very orange looking Franz Beckenbauer. I didn’t listen to his speech. Whatever, the Kaiser is awesome. NASL got a nice shoutout in Beckenbauer’s montage.

Then Iniesta had a montage in which his wife said his life would be complete once he has a son, because Iniesta is a king of some sort and needs an heir I guess.

Then a guy from an oil-rich Gulf state talked about fair play very badly, and Uzbekistan won a fair play award for reasons I can only hope are grounded in empirical reality.

Then Messi’s montage told us his contract for Barca was signed on a napkin. My will is written on a napkin, btw.

Then Amy McDonald reminded me not to buy an Amy McDonald album.

Then the three nominees for the Woman Player of the Year hung out on a bench together and had some laughs for the camera while they asked each other softball questions, and I wondered where in the living hell Christine Sinclair was. Then Abby Wambach won and basically all the Americans on my Twitter feed teared up and cried, and pooled their tears into a giant ice cube tray, and then coloured the ice cubes with red, white and blue food colouring. I’m just kidding—there’s no such thing as white food colouring.

Then Messi won and Ronaldo looked comically sad, again. Then it ended.

Photo of the Day

Photo of the seating plan for the Ballon D’Or courtesy of Richard Motzkin. You can watch the awards ceremony today live at the FIFA website here.

As noted by the National Post:

SAO PAULO, Brazil — Barcelona’s Lionel Messi and Andres Iniesta, and Real Madrid’s Cristiano Ronaldo are the finalists for FIFA’s male player of the year.

But Canadian captain Christine Sinclair did not make the women’s shortlist.

The women’s final three consists of Americans Abby Wambach and Alex Morgan and Brazil’s Marta, a five-time winner.

Unlike the men’s list, in which the same three names were expected to show up again with either Xavi or Iniesta fighting for the third spot, the women’s list is actually interesting. Which is why the selection of Marta is so infuriating. Marta’s Brazil went out to Japan in the quarterfinals. Marta scored a single goal in the tournament, a penalty in the 73rd minute against Cameroon as part of a 5-0 drubbing.

Meanwhile Canada’s Christine Sinclair led the tournament in scoring with six goals, three against eventual gold medallists USA in the semifinal match, on their way to a bronze medal. It was by far the most high profile women’s event of the entire year. Surely Sinclair, on the evidence, is more deserving? Even Grant Wahl, who was critical of Sinclair’s and Canada’s behaviour in the semifinal against the US, acknowledged the omission:

So what gives?

FIFA’s website explains a bit about the process:

A ten-player shortlist was unveiled for the FIFA’s Women’s Player of the Year, which was chosen by experts from FIFA’s Committee for Women’s Football and the FIFA Women’s World Cup and a group of experts from France Football.

These have both been reduced to three players for each award, being announced on 29 November.

Reduced by whom? Certainly Sinclair would have been on the list of ten. Some are already citing ‘politics’ as the reason for Sinclair’s omission (she received a fine and four game suspension for her remarks to the referee post Olympics). Yet if we’re to take FIFA’s admittedly vague wording on face value, one presumes the voting is already complete on the 10 finalists, with both journalists (who knows who they are? I didn’t vote) and FAs selecting their top three. As the FIFA gala page itself explains, “As per the men’s award, journalists, plus national coaches and captains, will all vote for the winner of FIFA Women’s World Player of the Year from this list.”

Therefore I think Ben Massey gets closer to the sad truth:

Plain old ignorance/laziness, from associations who had no clue and journalists who couldn’t give a shit. Bravo, FIFA. And let this be a reminder to you kids: awards nice, but beware of throwing them around as an objective measure of quality.

Well, this is a big one. Joey Barton’s website contains an interesting post. Moreover, it’s so interesting I’m sitting here clacking keys on it. And I am going to provide a link to it. Here it is.

In truth, the post was written by the Sunday Times’ writer Jonathan Northcroft. It’s an interesting take on the popularity contest that is now the FIFA Ballon D’Or, which used to among Europe’s most prestigious awards (even though Michael Owen won it in 2001), and is now kind of a glossy shit show. Northcroft points out some of the missing names on the list:

The winner will be one of Cristiano Ronaldo, Lionel Messi, Iker Casillas, Anders Iniesta, Xavi or Andrea Pirlo and who could argue with their inclusion among the 23? But why is Mario Balotelli on it? For Italy at the Euros, Antonio Cassano and Claudio Marchisio were more consistent. For Manchester City, David Silva and Vincent Kompany were better. But none of these made the list.

Did Wayne Rooney really have a good enough 2012 to merit inclusion? The reasoning given on his FIFA pen-pic is weak: “with 14 goals between February and May 2012, Wayne Rooney was indispensible for Manchester United.” Why is Gerard Pique there? Good player, but a mediocre year. Ah, wait, he might bring Shakira to that gala night in Zurich.

From there however, Northcroft pivots to a bizarre assessment of the worthlessness of player ratings (they are worthless), but then offers this defense:

Well, here’s how it works. You’re reporting on a match. You have 900 words to write about the game, which has to be completed and sent to your editor – during the match itself. The physical act of just typing 900 words takes (assuming an average speed of 40 words per minute) more than 20 minutes. You also have to make notes, watch replays on your monitor in the press box, take calls from your editor and send your copy by email. Probably half of the 105 minutes available (the game plus half-time) is spend on simply the mechanics of reporting.

So you have about 50 minutes to actually watch the game. In an average match only about two-thirds are spent with the ball ‘in play’. Basically, the reporter is only fully focused on watching play for about 30 minutes per match. As Americans say, do the math: even if you focused your eyes solely on each player in turn (surely the only way to grade a performance – you need to see everything, off the ball movement etc as well as what happens when the ball is at a player’s feet) you’d have a little more than one minute per player through which to arrive at a grading. But of course you can’t even do that – you’re having to watch the general flow of play for the purposes of your main responsibility, your match report.

Um? As someone who’s been writing post-match recaps for the last year and a half in the Champions League, I really don’t think this is the case. First, there is a plethora of sites offering verifiable, objective indications of a player’s activity in a match. This shouldn’t be the basis of a rating by any stretch, but they can anchor in empirical fact what are always going to be subjective impressions of a football match.

But the main point is: really? There are people who take match ratings seriously? And what editor is calling in the middle of a match you’re supposed to be writing about?