DNA testing

[Crowked]

Personaly I think until David Grainger's corpse is incinerated, Port can not be trusted with DNA or any other genetic information for that matter.


hehehehehe


but seriously, it was good to see Andy D knock this one on the head up front. Surely there is enough information on young players with out this sort of crap. It wouldnt be long before there would be teenage boys taking all sorts of drugs trying to improve their results and increase their chances of being drafted.

Having heard the doctor (cant recall her name) on 5aa last night discussing the pro's and con's, I'm sure there are alternate tests available to obtain most of the information DNA testing would provide anyway.

I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons not to do it as well.

Thoughts?

 

[noddy]

Personaly I think until David Grainger's corpse is incinerated, Port can not be trusted with DNA or any other genetic information for that matter.


hehehehehe


but seriously, it was good to see Andy D knock this one on the head up front. Surely there is enough information on young players with out this sort of crap. It wouldnt be long before there would be teenage boys taking all sorts of drugs trying to improve their results and increase their chances of being drafted.

Having heard the doctor (cant recall her name) on 5aa last night discussing the pro's and con's, I'm sure there are alternate tests available to obtain most of the information DNA testing would provide anyway.

I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons not to do it as well.

Thoughts?

Well i was one who would have liked Fud to be put through the scientific roller coaster in regards to cloning.

But i agree better to keep these sort of things away from clubs like you know who.

 

[- PC -]

I just think science has taken over football too much.. a ''Collingwood 6 footer'' used to symbolise a strong running ruck-rover CHF/CHB type. Now its a rover. I do get concerned when a players beep test is more important than his ability to get the ball, and DNA testing is a further step towards picking an athletic type and making them footballers.

IF YOU CANT GET THE BALL DONT BOTHER TURNING UP SHOULD BE THE MANTRA OF ALL CLUBS

 

[Fergus]

Very much against DNA testing - I really think it is taking science too far.

I very much doubt that DNA testing would have suggested any club take a player like Greg Williams or Roger James. Neither have physical attributes on their side but were/are fantastic footballers due to their football brain.

 

[Truck Rutten]

Do you think DNA testing would have identified Angwin as being a head case? If so then I'm all for it so we never waste another high pick on a petty criminal, loser again

 

[Crowz Gal]

As of now, can DNA testing actually predict how good a player will be???
This is all a bit GATTACA to me

 

[ignoranus]

It doesnt do anything yet anyway (not to say it won't in future).
Clubs are just wasting their money.
AFL is doing them a favour.

 

[macca23]

Very much against DNA testing - I really think it is taking science too far.

I very much doubt that DNA testing would have suggested any club take a player like Greg Williams or Roger James. Neither have physical attributes on their side but were/are fantastic footballers due to their football brain.

As you put it Fergus. I'm delighted the AFL is going to legislate against this illogical potential barrier to even more genuine footballers being precluded from having any chance of being picked up.

"yes, sorry young Carey, but your DNA didn't stack up. We suggest you play another sport."

 

[brucetiki]

DNA testing being used to recruit players is quite simply disgraceful and immoral. IMO it's worse than drug cheats. I am dead against any DNA testing, and well done to the AFL for being pro-active and planning to ban it.

IMO when the AFL bans DNA testing, it should be made retrospective and any club that has engaged in DNA testing at all should be expelled from the competition.

 

[cro_Magnum]

DNA testing being used to recruit players is quite simply disgraceful and immoral. IMO it's worse than drug cheats. I am dead against any DNA testing, and well done to the AFL for being pro-active and planning to ban it.

IMO when the AFL bans DNA testing, it should be made retrospective and any club that has engaged in DNA testing at all should be expelled from the competition.

Not only that but its stupid because its untested, unproven and basically worthless (at the moment).

 

[MaccasNeighbour]

Footballers are not recruited until they are 17. At this age if you want to know how high he can jump, then make him jump. If you want to know how fast he can run, then make him run.

DNA testing would only be useful if clubs start recruiting boys when they're still in primary school. Although let be clear that such tests do not yet even exist.

Unfortunately Demetriou has jumped on the anti-science bandwagon propogated by the media. It's obvious he has not sought any sound expert advice on the subject before going off half-baked about it. He didn't even bother to explain why he was against DNA testing. It was more of a 'I don't know much about it, but I know I don't like' statement. He also threw in "I don't agree with cloning either" just for good measure, even though it really had nothing to do with the subject.

I also wonder, if science had provided a cure for his wife before she died of cancer, whether Demetriou would have refused treatment because he 'didn't like it'.

 

[MaccasNeighbour]

DNA testing being used to recruit players is quite simply disgraceful and immoral. IMO it's worse than drug cheats. I am dead against any DNA testing, and well done to the AFL for being pro-active and planning to ban it.

IMO when the AFL bans DNA testing, it should be made retrospective and any club that has engaged in DNA testing at all should be expelled from the competition.

DNA has not yet been used, it is not currently be used and probably will not be used any time soon.

I am interested to know why you are so strongly against it though. Not having a go, just curious to know what your reasoning is.

 

[ignoranus]

Very good points Maccasneighbour.
I also thought it odd that AD would throw in an irrelevant swipe at cloning.

but

At this age if you want to know how high he can jump, then make him jump. If you want to know how fast he can run, then make him run.

I think the point is that such tests will (someday) measure potential. ie. What somebody's capacity is with training rather than current ability.

I notice NC welcomes debate on the topic, whilst also saying they dont measure anything useful yet.

Here is a thought. Assuming DNA tests will someday have some validity at measuring athletic potential (and I think they will), do you think it will be OK to use them to steer teenagers to certain olympic sports? You can bet they will be used whether you like it or not if they are at all useful. And if it is OK for olympic sports, why not for football?

Here is another thought.
Is it OK to measure someone's percentage of slow/fast twitch muscle cells in their legs to determine athletic potential? A high proportion of slow twitch cells might mean that person has greater endurance potential, so could be a midfielder (for example). This can be measured now. I bet anything that AFL players have had muscle biopsies to ascertain this (maybe even the Crows given the background of their coach).

Muscle biopsies hurt. If a DNA test could be found to determine the genetic disposition toward the proportion of slow twitch to fast twitch muscle cells, would that not be preferable to the biopsy? Why isn't AD banning muscle biopsies in AFL since they provide useful information now rather than just pie-in-the-sky dreams? It was clearly just a knee-jerk, technophobic reaction, made before any rational debate on the topic had occurred.

 

[MaccasNeighbour]

Very good points Maccasneighbour.
I also thought it odd that AD would throw in an irrelevant swipe at cloning.

but


I think the point is that such tests will (someday) measure potential. ie. What somebody's capacity is with training rather than current ability.

I notice NC welcomes debate on the topic, whilst also saying they dont measure anything useful yet.

Here is a thought. Assuming DNA tests will someday have some validity at measuring athletic potential (and I think they will), do you think it will be OK to use them to steer teenagers to certain olympic sports? You can bet they will be used whether you like it or not if they are at all useful. And if it is OK for olympic sports, why not for football?

Here is another thought.
Is it OK to measure someone's percentage of slow/fast twitch muscle cells in their legs to determine athletic potential? A high proportion of slow twitch cells might mean that person has greater endurance potential, so could be a midfielder (for example). This can be measured now. I bet anything that AFL players have had muscle biopsies to ascertain this (maybe even the Crows given the background of their coach).

Muscle biopsies hurt. If a DNA test could be found to determine the genetic disposition toward the proportion of slow twitch to fast twitch muscle cells, would that not be preferable to the biopsy? Why isn't AD banning muscle biopsies in AFL since they provide useful information now rather than just pie-in-the-sky dreams? It was clearly just a knee-jerk, technophobic reaction, made before any rational debate on the topic had occurred.

Nice to see some intelligent and thoughtful discussion on the subject, your name does not suit you Ignoramus.

You are right in that biopsies have most likely been used by many sports in this country, I first heard of that particular test about 10 years ago.

I think there is little doubt that DNA testing to measure potential will be available one day. Like any topic worthy of debate there are pros and cons and I was glad to hear that NC is encouraging discussion, rather than the knee jerk reaction of AD.

There has already been suggestion that some very good footballers have missed out on being drafted because they have not been up to scratch at such tests as the beep test. Personally I find it difficult to believe that a football club would be as narrowminded to rely purely on such data, otherwise why would they have scouts going to junior football tournaments over the country?

I think there is room for science in football as well as other professional sports. That may include stretch tests, beep tests, muscle biopsies, or indeed DNA testing. There is no point in burying our heads in the sand on such topics. The fact is no one single test will ever be used to determine whether a young athlete is worthy of being drafted because no one single test could possibly give that much information, not even DNA testing. If a young footballer has outstanding talent does any sensible person really think they wont be drafted because of a DNA test?

On the one hand I think AD may have had good intentions in raising the subject, unfortunately I don't think he thought his words through too carefully before blurting them out. Sadly most people in football don't have the level headedness of NC.

 

[Crowz Gal]

The thing that would worry me is that if they started DNA testing younger children and the particular child did not have the genes to play football, would this put children off playing sport. Kids mightn't bother playing sport if they're genes suggested theyd have no future in it.

 

[Rave Slave]

I'd be interested to know what Port fans actually think on this one.

Personally I'm against it, not because it's Port's idea but because I find it immoral and unethical.

I hope no club is ever allowed to perform tests like these (AFC included)

 

[ignoranus]

Nice to see some intelligent and thoughtful discussion on the subject, your name does not suit you Ignoramus.

Jeez... my cover is in danger of being sprung... better fix it fast!
So, presumably Maccasneighbour is also Lleytonsneighbour?
Doesn't he keep you awake all night when Bec is there, with all the shouts of "Come on!" until the early hours?