This is a national record holder. A two-time record breaker. A 21-year-old who qualified on merit, with his participation costs fully borne by the Olympic Council of Malaysia (OCM). Yet this story is not just about Fakhrul.

It exposes a selection system that reeks of inconsistency, opacity and detachment from a basic, global truth in elite sport: current form must come first. In the United States, long regarded as the gold standard in track and field, even Olympic champions lose their place if they fail to finish in the top three at the national trials.

Past glory carries no weight. There is no room for sympathy. Only results matter. Malaysia operates by a different logic. For one it doesn’t have national trials, and for events like Sukma, selections are often finalised months in advance.

In that time, athletes can lose form, fall behind or simply stagnate, and yet remain protected in the squad. Meanwhile, athletes who peak later in the season or show consistent improvement get locked out because the list is already “final”. No uniformity. No transparency. No clearly applied benchmark.

Selection — or selective?

Fakhrul’s case may be the most visible, but it is not the only one raising eyebrows. Two names continue to draw concern: Khairul Hafiz Jantan and Muhammad Aiman Najmi. Both recorded their strongest performances at the Super Series in May 2025. After that, injuries and a loss of form reportedly set in.

Yet Khairul was selected, justified by head coach Manshahar Abdul Jalil on the basis of an earlier 10.55s run and his “experience”. Since then, Khairul failed to qualify for the semi-finals in a subsequent outing and has shown no clear resurgence in form.

Aiman posted a promising run at the Super Series, but did not compete at the Malaysia Open and later clocked 49.90s at the Innotex–BJSS meet in the 400m — hardly a sign of peak readiness for a major regional competition. Meanwhile, Fakhrul remains third in the Southeast Asia rankings for the 400m hurdles. Still, he was left out.

The question now writes itself: Are we selecting athletes on current, consistent performance — or on isolated runs, reputation, and sentiment?

The inconvenient truth behind Fakhrul’s time

Fakhrul’s most recent 53.12s at the Varsity Track & Field Championships (VTF) has been used to justify his omission. On paper, it looks ordinary. In reality, he ran that time on a wet track, under rainy conditions, and fresh off recovery from a grade-three hamstring injury. This is the same athlete who broke the national record in 2023 with 51.26s, then shattered it again at Sukma 2024 with 51.11s. He qualifies under Category A standards.

This is not a narrative of decline. It is a story of resilience, recovery and proven ceiling. This is now the second time Fakhrul has been denied a SEA Games opportunity — first in Cambodia, now Thailand. How much more must an athlete produce before merit is finally acknowledged?

Then there is Aidil Azhar, who featured in Malaysia’s 4x400m relay team that achieved Category A qualification at the Malaysian Open Championships. He followed that with a 48.17s in the 400m at the VTF Grand Final, a genuine, competitive performance by any standard. Despite his consistency and contribution, he too was dropped.

If an athlete who helps qualify a relay team and runs sub-49 seconds is still not considered good enough, then what, exactly, qualifies as “good enough” in Malaysia?

Who disappears when the curtain closes?

Perhaps the most disturbing element lies behind the scenes. Several junior athletes, initially listed after showing steady improvement, saw their names quietly removed at the final stage. Established names replaced them. This is the exact moment young athletes need faith, exposure and opportunity.

Instead, they received a blunt message: progress is not enough. Reputation outweighs results. What does that tell the next generation of Malaysian runners?

The questions Malaysia Athletics must now answer

Malaysia Athletics owes athletes and the public clear, direct answers:

What is the primary selection benchmark for the SEA Games — SEA ranking, World Athletics ranking, or domestic performances? 

How much weight was given to single runs like the Super Series versus season-long consistency? 

Why were recognised domestic meets such as VTF and Innotex–BJSS seemingly sidelined? 

What formal protocol exists for selecting athletes returning from injury? 

Is there a fixed cut-off date after which current form is ignored? 

Why were improving junior athletes removed at the final stage?

These are not hostile questions. They are the minimum expected of any credible governing body. Yet, Malaysia Athletics secretary-general Nurhayati Karim has offered no response.

This is bigger than the SEA Games

This is not an attack on individual athletes or coaches. It is a demand for clarity, structure and fairness in a system that shapes careers and crushes dreams. When even a national record holder, a Category A qualifier, and consistently performing athletes can be excluded without a transparent rationale, the message to Malaysia’s youth is devastating:

Your effort may not matter. Your progress may not matter. Your records may not matter. In the end, the question is no longer who gets to wear Malaysia’s colours in Thailand.