If there's one sporting event that bows to excessive, politically correct behaviour more than the Halberg Awards, then I've yet to encounter it.

In fact, I reckon that in regards to the lists of finalists, the occasion is becoming more flawed and out-of-kilter every year.

To me, the hordes (30 this year) of judges are either briefed to or go out of their way to pretend that every sport involved enjoys pretty much the same support and following from sports fans across the country.

Once that pc box has been ticked, that ensures this swarm of Halberg judges are bound to treat karting for example, as though it's as relevant as rugby, cricket, league or netball etc.

The other politically correct box that the welter of judges obviously must tick is the one that stipulates that the popularity of the sport in terms of the depth of the competition involved worldwide is also largely disregarded.

That's why we've become used to the endless rowing nominations, despite the fact that it seems like there's a World Rowing Championship of some description every few months, most of which are rarely attended by all of the best rowers available.

Let me in no particular order, detail what I believe are some particularly ordinary pc decisions to back up my assertions.

Let's look at the 2009 list of finalists.

How on earth did David Tua or Ryan Nelsen not make the five finalists for Sportsman of the Year over Duncan Grant?

Hardly any of my sports-mad mates who I spoke to before writing this blog have actually ever heard of Grant.

In comparison, Tua electrified hundreds of thousands of Kiwi fans from all sporting denominations when he proved his comeback is all about action, not just words.

And why hasn't Ryan Nelsen finally been acknowledged for not only having regularly been participating in the biggest sport on this planet in the toughest league of them all, making him our highest paid athlete, but also for his wonderfully calming influence in captaining the All Whites in their successful campaign to take a hallowed role in this year's World Cup?

Going back over the last decade, how come rugby, our most popular sport by far has featured in the Halbergs so poorly?

How come neither Richie McCaw nor Dan Carter, two of our greatest All Blacks ever have not won the Sportsman of the Year title, especially in any of those years when the All Blacks dominated international rugby.

Is that because there is a persuasive bias towards individual sports and in particular Olympic medal winners, regardless of how insignificant the sport is in New Zealand?

Of course, we're all familiar with the insulting way that the 2005 Kiwis were not included in the finalists when they won the Tri-Nations crown that year.

These are some of my personal issues with the Halbergs. Undoubtedly, you will have others.

I also have a real gripe with fact that horse racing and more specifically, certain jockeys' and drivers' feats are shunned.

I reckon that's because horse racing is largely frowned upon by so much of the pc-riddled sports media who see the industry in general and punting in particular as a shady aberration to be ignored.

How patronising and absurd.

You only have to compare that puritanical attitude here with the celebratory way the Aussies love and respect their racing industry and how their champion jockeys and drivers are recognised and revered.

So that's my personal take on the Halberg Awards and the direction they appear to steadfastly sticking to. I stress the word personal.

I really do wish that they would shake off what I perceive is an ever-thickening shroud of dull, irrelevant political correctness enveloping them.

Am I alone in my judgement? Your opinions are most welcome.