Falla has won hardly anything this year.
I know slams are important, but you can't reward someone with a WC because he had 1 good week out of a whole year.
How do they make their decisions anyway?
Do they only look at RG results?
Do they only consider recent results?
If we're talking about 4th round results in a slam, shouldn't Daniel Brands get a WC based on his reaching 4th round at Wimbledon 2010? At least that was on grass.
They look specifically at that year's Roland Garros, presumably because a) that player is in form so unlikely to have a poor showing a couple of weeks later and b) because that player will have grabbed people's attention, so they might be a popular choice. I really doubt they will care whether someone reached the fourth round at the US Open last year, for example.
They obviously do take previous editions of Wimbledon - and a player's pedigree on grass - into consideration, so in that light Brands is not without a shot, but I would be extremely shocked if he was awarded a WC. The organisers will pick Falla over him.