Luka Modric wins FIFA's Best Men's Player Award

In a shocking turn of events, and for the first time in 10 years, a player not named Lionel Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo has been named as the world's best (at least officially). Croatian international and Real Madrid midfielder Luka Modric has taken home the award, beating out former teammate and winner Cristiano Ronaldo, as well as Liverpool's record-breaking Mohamed Salah in a vote which is determined by users online, national team coaches, national team captains and football journalists, all in equal parts.

After winning his third consecutive Champions League with Los Blancos, taking home UEFA's Men's Player of the Year award, leading Croatia to a World Cup final and taking home the event's Golden Ball for being the star of the tournament, the 33-year-old has enjoyed what is by far the most fruitful spell of his career, with his newest accolade putting the icing on the cake.

Though he does not score the most goals or create the most chances, many point to his quiet consistency, tempo-setting, dogged defending and decisive passing as justification for his win. At this summer's showpiece in Russia, he scored twice, assisted once, covered the most distance, completed the most long balls (for an outfield player) and the fourth-most passes. It's this versatility that also makes him stand out. While perhaps not being the best at any one thing, he excels at practically everything. He ranks among the best in Europe when it comes to both pass accuracy, winning duels and interceptions, aspects of the game that most of his contemporaries specialize in only one of.

The decision has split public opinion, from the casual fan to the professional analyst. Though he was a clear-cut candidate for all the aforementioned reasons, his detractors say that he does not possess the sheer technical ability or statistical production that his competition has. People like Salah, Ronaldo and Messi contribute to an obscene amount of goals, assists, chances created, dribbles, take-ons, etc., stats that have a much more tangible impact on the game, not to mention how flashy and entertaining they are.

Many questions remain. Did the voters make the right choice, or should the Portuguese-Argentine duopoly have continued? Was it based on merit or sentiment? Are Messi and Ronaldo so good that people have just become desensitized to their astonishing feats, or was Modric simply better? Let the debate commence.