However, despite the success of the ceremony itself, issues surrounding some of the winners has highlighted the urgent need to refine and clarify the selection criteria used to determine award recipients. For instance, how did Ntungamili Raguin, who had an outstanding year, miss out on nomination for Sportsman of the Year award? Athletics has been the stand out code and the expectation was it would be named code of the year or the administrator of the year should have come from that section. But due to the awards criteria, which must be made public, athletics as a code, was nowhere to be seen despite its athletes dominating the night. When the selection process appears inconsistent or insufficiently transparent, it risks undermining the credibility of the awards and discouraging athletes who may feel overlooked despite exceptional performances. One of the recurring concerns from stakeholders is the apparent imbalance between international achievement and domestic popularity.
There is a need to balance, or clearly spell out this grey area. While popularity and influence are important aspects of modern sport, awards should primarily recognise measurable sporting achievement. Athletes who compete successfully on continental or global stages carry the Botswana flag under immense pressure and should be evaluated through objective benchmarks such as medals won, and rankings achieved throughout the year. Another issue is the lack of publicly available weighting criteria. The public often remains uncertain about how judges separate nominees with equally impressive credentials. Without transparent scoring systems, speculation naturally arises regarding favouritism.. A more detailed framework that allocates percentages to performance indicators would improve confidence in the process. Transparency does not weaken the authority of judges, instead, it strengthens trust in their decisions.
