Five reasons why Messi should have been nominated for the FIFA Best Award
It is no longer news that Messi was omitted from the top three nominees for the FIFA Best awards, as he was beaten to the podium by Cristiano Ronaldo, Luka Modric and Mo Salah. The snub marked the first time the 31-year-old would fail to make the top three of FIFA's grand award since 2007.
As expected, the decision to exclude Messi generated a lot of intense debate online, with an almost equal number of fans ridiculing the decision by posting stats and figures supporting Messi's cause on one side, and another set suggesting that he didn't have a good season, hence the justification of the snub.
Like any other story, there are two sides to this one, and while there are numerous genuine reasons why Messi's exclusion was justified, there are also valid factors supporting his inclusion. Here are five reasons why Messi should have made it to the final three nominees for the FIFA Best award.
#5 He had a poor World Cup campaign, but so did Mo Salah
Without a doubt, this year's FIFA World Cup had an overbearing influence in deciding the nominees, respecting the age-old tradition which a lot of people had clamored for, and was made possible by the separation of the Ballon d'Or from the FIFA award in 2016.
Lionel Messi went into the World Cup with high hopes of captaining Argentina to its third World Cup triumph and first since predecessor Diego Maradona did so in 1986. It would have also ended his country's arduous 25-year wait for a major international trophy.
By and large, Messi undoubtedly failed in his quest, and critics point to this reason as the major one for his exclusion. The 2105 Ballon d'Or winner scored just one goal in four matches, as Argentina shambolically crashed out of Russia 2018 in the second round.
However, it must also be noted that one of the three nominees Mo Salah did not have a great campaign either, as the Pharaohs of Egypt were the first side to get eliminated from the group stage at the World Cup. and failed to pick up a single point, posting three losses, with Mo Salah scoring two goals.
Given that the current Premier League Golden Boot winner went into the World Cup not fully fit, following the shoulder breaking tackle by Sergio Ramos in the Champions League final, which made him miss Egypt's opening day loss to Iran, his goal return of two in two matches is pretty impressive.
What makes the situation even more incomparable is that Egypt and Argentina arrived the tournament with markedly different objectives, owing to their difference in pedigree and caliber of players, so it would be unfair to suggest that Mo Salah underperformed at the World Cup, as he was responsible for all his country's goals at the Mundial.
However, to gauge his World Cup performance by external factors such as these is irrational, as great players' impacts in tournaments are judged by their personal outputs and not the strength of their team. After all, Hristo Stoichkov won the 1994 World Cup Silver Ball, and Ballon d'Or after leading unfancied Bulgaria to a third-place finish in the USA.
If Salah's could merit a place on the podium despite his uninspiring World Cup campaign, then, by and large, Messi's performance at the Mundial shouldn't be a yardstick for his exclusion from the top three. Enough of the hypocrisy and double standard.