"The Ballon d'Or is more to do with marketing and press than for achievements on the pitch. I've earned all the awards I've been given. The Golden Shoe is for scoring the most goals and there's no option for people to take that away from me.

Since the Ballon d'Or and the FIFA World Player of the Year award were merged in 2010, there have been just two winners—Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo. While the duo undoubtedly deserve most of the accolades that have been thrown in the path, it is hard to miss the fact that there has been a sense of inevitability attached to the award in the past six years. The only thing that is often debated is the 'third player' who will feature in the top-three.

Before merging with FIFA, France Football were the organizers of this award which was originally awarded to the best European player of the season. Initially, players of only European origin were awarded the Ballon d'Or, however, all the players playing at a European club were eligible for the award since 1995 when George Weah won it while playing for AC Milan.

The initial voting system of the Ballon d'Or included only Europe-based journalists. In 2007, the scope of the award was changed to one where all the players across the world were eligible for it, while journalists from all over the world voted for it. However, the format changed drastically once FIFA got involved in it.

Open disclosure of the results:

With the full disclosure of the results, no Argentine would vote against Lionel Messi, while the Portuguese would always opt for Cristiano Ronaldo. Similarly, most of the voters are inclined to vote for players of their respective clubs or national teams.

Fernando Santos was the only Portuguese who voted for Lionel Messi last year. The only Argentine who voted for someone other than Messi for the first spot was Messi himself because by the rules he cannot do that.

While the global nature of the voters makes for a good show, the possibility of this 'global' set of electors having hardly watched or encountered any of the footballers play for a complete season makes them no better than the armchair fans. Last year, Pakistan coach Mohammed Shamlan Mubarak Basheer Al Shamlan voted for Arjen Robben in the first place despite the Bayern Munich winger spending most of the year on the treatment table, while the Guatemala and Mauritania captains both went for Javier Mascherano.

Tactical voting:

It is not that their votes affect the eventual result in a big way, but it does show how competitive these two players are for the award.

A lot of deserving candidates who should have been considered for the award have been lost in the shadow that this fight casts every year. However, with Ballon d'Or ending its stint under FIFA, hopes of a much fairer contest have risen. It is not to say that a voting system where only the journalists will cast their votes will be without its shortcomings. There will still be biases—every journalist has them, just that they are better at shielding them behind flowery languages. However, the electors will at least be without the fear of being on the wrong side of their star teammates or worry about team cohesion while casting their votes. Had this voting system been used in the past six years, this is how the results would have differed:

- In 2013, Franck Ribery would have won the Ballon d'Or, by a big margin with 77 votes, with Cristiano (47 votes) and Messi (31 votes) taking second and third place respectively. Instead, the Real Madrid man walked away with the prize.

- In 2014, Manuel Neuer would have finished above Messi in the second place with 37 votes compared to just 4 votes for the Argentine. Ronaldo would have still won the award, though.

This year, Barcelona's Luis Suarez is perhaps the most deserving candidate. But, he is unlikely to win it considering Portugal's success in the Euros and Real Madrid's success in the Champions League. Also, as Suarez had pointed out earlier, he is not as marketable as Messi or Ronaldo, given how Ballon d'Or stresses on 'behavior'. Back in 2013, it looked like Ribery would walk away with the trophy when the initial results were disclosed, but then FIFA chose to extend the voting deadline to November 29 and Ronaldo produced a memorable performance in the World Cup Qualifiers against Sweden. The Portuguese star walked away with the award as the Bayern Munich manager Uli Hoeness labeled it as an 'embarrassing conspiracy'.

Had the voting system been improved earlier, and had FIFA not leeched on the award for the past six years, Messi and Ronaldo would have won at least one less Ballon d'Or each. The likes of Ribery and Iniesta would, deservingly, have won an award each. Not that these players, or the defenders and goalkeepers of this world, need any award to validate their contribution or quality. It is just that Ballon d'Or has long turned into a farce—a two-horse race which still manages to retain its label of being the best race out there. How daft are we?