Stereotypes aside, what credible research can you point to contradicting genetics role in sports injuries?
Im saying this is a slippery slope we are on right now.
If you can isolate a gene that proves athletes are more prone to certain types of injury than others, you may as well test for it and eliminate that athlete from consideration for employment.
If the argument is that the body does not produce adequate collagen to prevent an ACL injury, how on earth does that equate to being inclined to suffer concussions more readily?
When an athlete has injuries to a specific muscle, ligament, or tendon, I can see the possibility of genetics being a cause, as well as malnutrition, or improper rehab. Re-injuring a pre-existing condition is commonplace. Genetic deficiencies are common in other areas as well.
But my issue here, is how this all pertains to Tua.
The kid hasnt injured the same body part twice in his career, with the exception of his concussion issues last year. Cartilage issues dont force a femur to blast through a hip socket. Cartilage issues dont prevent a brain from being concussed.
This Injury prone debate has been spurred by people who simply dont like the kid, and im ****ing sick of it.
Show me that Tua has a genetic propensity for injury and I might consider it. Until then people need to stfu about it.
EDIT: After thinking about this more, I would be more tolerable of people calling Tua "Reckless", rather than injury prone. I just dont think his size or genetic make up have anything to do with his injuries.