It is that time of the year when footballers who play in Europe are acknowledged in the Ballon d’Or awards. Let’s be honest, some supporters enjoy the aftermath more than the ceremony itself. Telling voters they are wrong and how flawed the criteria is seems more enjoyable to some than predicting who the winners should be.
For decades organisers were told their ceremony was corrupt. Apparently, Messi and Ronaldo were only ever named the best players to appease sponsors, not because they were simply really good at their job. 2025 is looking no different.
I know people who, in one breath, say Bonmatí cannot be the best female talent because she lost the Champions League and Euros final, yet in the same sentence complain that what Arsenal did in Europe should not be prioritised over Chelsea’s domestic treble.
So as it seems the theme for the week, let’s talk about a man who can make a fair claim that it is unjust that the Ballon d’Or is one of the few trophies missing from his collection.
Henry’s greatest season
In Arsenal’s proud history, no player has won the main prize. The closest Gunner to do so since its inception in 1956 was Thierry Henry, who finished runner-up in 2003. Many claim the Frenchman was unlucky to lose out to Pavel Nedvěd.
In my opinion, he was more unfortunate not to be judged on the current criteria. For the majority of its existence, contenders for the prize were judged across the calendar year. That meant being assessed on the second half of one season and the first half of the next.
It was only in 2022 that France Football modified its rules, insisting those on the shortlist would be compared by actual seasons. That is how most supporters follow the sport. The action starts in August and you watch the various stories unfold until May, before we all take a summer break and do it again.
Such was the magnitude of the Invincibles’ achievement that if Henry had been able to put that entire campaign forward, it would have blown Nedvěd and Shevchenko out of the water.
When some Gooners point out that Arsène Wenger was able to win trophies without the budget Mikel Arteta has been afforded, it is not to disrespect the current manager but to remind those who maybe took for granted what Wenger did for the club.
There was a feeling that Arsenal had thrown away the title in 2002-03, more than Man United had earned it. The Gunners had an eight-point lead that March. Our response that summer was to replace David Seaman with Lehmann, Senderos and Clichy for a combined £7 million, while Sir Alex Ferguson spent around £57 million and Chelsea were suddenly taken over by Roman Abramovich.
Permission had already been granted to build the Emirates, meaning Arsenal would not be able to compete financially at the top level for years. That made Henry, Pires and Vieira extending their contracts vital.
The Invincibles leader
Very soon there was an obvious French connection in North London, but those players had been taught British values by the likes of Tony Adams, Lee Dixon, Martin Keown and Ray Parlour. That is why Arsenal ended up as a unique team of foreigners who truly identified with The Arsenal.
Think North London derbies or battles at Old Trafford – here were players from France who genuinely cared about the occasion. Henry, not yet captain, had become one of the vocal leaders. Four goals in five games were no longer met with a smile but with a glare and a snarl.
His response was ruthless: braces against Newcastle and Leeds, a winner against Chelsea, and goals in Europe. A hat-trick of assists at Birmingham left Steve Bruce describing Henry as the best player in the world.
Even rivals could not deny how special he was. He was not a poacher, preferring to drift wide, with assists as important as goals. In an FA Cup tie at Portsmouth, he battered the home side so much that Fratton Park gave him a standing ovation.
As 2004 began, Henry had reached a level few sportspeople ever touch – world class, but now with a belief that everything he touched turned to gold. His performances against Liverpool and Leeds in that Easter week remain among the greatest by any Premier League player.
By the time Arsenal sealed the title at White Hart Lane, Henry was the one leading his team-mates to the away end, insisting they enjoy the moment. He scored 39 goals and registered 15 assists in all competitions, winning the European Golden Shoe.
Most of all, he captured our hearts.
Thierry Henry should have won the Ballon d’Or.
What do you think, Gooners? Was 2003-04 the year the greatest Gunner of them all was robbed of football’s top individual prize?
Dan Smith
__________________________________________________________________________________________
ADMIN COMMENT
So here are some simple rules which I must insist commenters follow….
You agree not to give any personal abuse to other Arsenal fans. Everyone is allowed to hold their own opinions even if you disagree with them. It COSTS NOTHING TO BE POLITE TO OTHER ARSENAL FANS.
CALLING ALL ARSENAL FANS! Anyone who would like to contribute an Article or Video opinion piece on JustArsenal, please contact us through this link…
I think pre Ronaldo-Messi ridiculousness every winner was deserving, criteria were not changed to suit a particular player achievements of the relevant season like they did in the majority of Messi’s wins.
The individual awards are stupid anyway. The trophy and medals won by the team should be reward enough or it should be only the team of the season award with each player given same trophy.
While I can’t say much about the pre Ronaldo and Messi nonsense, I pretty much agree that the award isn’t worth it anymore. FIFA made it about two players whose individual achievements each season were compared and the better guy got the prize. Everyone else was deemed not good enough.
I feel the biggest robbery was giving Messi the award in 2010 when Wesley Schneider won Serie A, the Champions League, Club world cup, Italian cup and got to the World cup finals, all while playing a key role. He won every club trophy available but Mesi got the award for winning what? La Liga?
He did not even deserve a top three spot that year. It should have been Schneider, Xavi, Iniesta. If I recall correctly he was given it because he scored most goals.
Just like he robbed Haaland who won the treble because he finally won the World Cup. If the roles were reversed and Messi won the treble and Haaland the World Cup, it would have still given to him.
I am so glad Messi and Ronaldo era is over. I hope the game will be like the 90s and 2000s where there were so many great players it was impossible for only two to have the spotlight. Their era became exhausting.
Trophies are won by teams not individuals
If you’re going to give award to players based on how many trophies they won in a season, many less than exceptional players will have been in winnning teams and many exceptional players will have been in teams that won nothing
Judge a player solely by what THEY did not by what their entire squad + manager did
Yesterday’s is much more brutal than Henry’s. Mariona Caldentey all day long. The imperfection of the selection system hit Arsenal twice. The 2003 prize winner Nedved of Juve even acknowledged Henry should take the prize not him. I think in 2003 Henry was 2nd and 4th in 2004. Bonmati yesterday also suggested there were better candidates than her. I think the then calendar year assessment period was confusing to the assessors though it is now corrected. Thus far only 6 black players won in Ronaldo Rivaldo Ronaldinho Gullit Weah and Dembele. Maybe colour bias is embedded there.
Well no because 6 won it ?
And disagree , look at what the winner won compared to the runner up
When asked which player should have definitely won the Ballon d ‘Or in his career, Drogba said Henry should have.
Ballon d’Or is a bit of a joke imo – it shouldn’t be considered the great prize but I suppose there’s nothing else that’s awarded to individuals. People treat it as though it means x was the best player of that year, but it’s based on voting by selected people, and is bound to be influenced by other factors. Trophies and things like scoring titles are undeniable, so should be considered more important than Ballon d’Or imo.
The worst for me was Owen winning it – I know he was a great striker, but he surely wasn’t the best player in the world that year (or any year). He won several competitions with Liverpool that season, but they were all the secondary cups and I’m not convinced he was even their best player at the time. I think it was an odd year and probably the better choice would have been someone from Bayern as they won the league and champions league, however the highest ranking player from that side was the GK, which wasn’t going to happen I guess.
I suppose Henry was unlucky, but normally I do think winning competitions plays a big part in the voting (so really, coming second that season could be seen as a huge sign of respect) and at least nedved was a truly great player who won a major title and came close in the Champions League that season.
As the journalists of different nations are involved in casting their votes for the Ballon d’or, there lies huge room for subjectivity that influences the preferences of that particular journalist. Except the relatively fairer Messi Ronaldo era, the selection had always been controversial as it was last season between Rodri and Vinicius prompting Real Madrid FC to boycott altogether the ceremony.
But that’s nothing to do with race
Real Madrid showed their total lack of class when they boycotted last years event. Throwing their toys out of the pram because their player never won the award. 🤦♂️
Winners are usually players who have been successful in European competition or international tournaments, domestic achievements count far less.
Nabilo,
It didn’t go like that in Women’s award. Bonmati won her domestic league with Barcelona. Caldentey won the Champions League with Arsenal. Look who won the award. 🤷♂️