Innominate bone position testing

It is of interest that all disciplines have been preoccupied with a better SIJ test, when maybe we need to reconsider.

Consider the eminent work by Andry Vleeming of the Netherlands entitled MOVEMENT, STABILITY AND LOW BACK PAIN.  In this publication of papers by the most eminent people of various disciplines, there are 3.5 pages of references to the SIJ in the index, but not one reference to the adductors

It is of interest that when one does the "standard" standing SIJ test of the landmarks of PSIS to sacrum with hip flexion or torso flexion  (Gillett test or stork test)and compares the supposed "stuck" SIJ to the results of a similar test using the landmarks of the PSIS to sacrum but altering it to a hip ABD or abduction, the results are opposite.  In the first test with hip flexion or torso flexion, the joint appears to move as one unit.  In the second test, the joint moves apart such that the PSIS moves superior and lateral to the sacrum.  How can this be a true "stuck" joint or "fixation" of the SIJ???

If we follow this with an innominate bone position test of ASIS to ASIS, PSIS to PSIS, and ASIS to PSIS(R&L) with hip ABD, we find some intersting results, which may change our thinking on the supposed importance of the SIJ.

What comments are out there? 

I have used the standing innominate bone position test for the past 15 years with great success.  I have compared it to the SIJ tests and have found it superior in many ways.