Did I ever in my post suggest that I support what Senna did? And can you point me to the quote from Senna where he said I took him out? From what I am aware, all Senna confessed to was that Prost was not going to turn the corner before him. And your analogy is totally wrong. Prost was given a choice, crash or let off which is more akin to " I will punch you or you have the choice of running away". Guess which one Prost chose. That is beside the point. All I did was point out that Senna was aggravated because of the politics that Prost and JMB were playing and the collision was the result of that.Siao7 wrote:I have no bias, but thanks for that. You realise that Senna admitted it himself about the accident, right? And do you feel that anyone who feels wronged by the stewards should go out and ram people? Or as you say give them the chance to get out of the way or crash?
Do you really feel that he gave Prost the chance to decide? If you tell someone "I'll kick you or punch you, the choice is yours", you are not giving them a choice my friend...
By the way it was the stewards that agreed the change, but they were not the ones that should have made that change.
Look, many think that this was justified in light of the chicane incident the year before, if people want to think that revenge is OK on a high speed corner (in which someone was killed in a similar accident a few years later) then they can I suppose.
I agree that he felt aggravated as you pointed out, but that doesn't excuse it. I didn't discount this fact, but he had the time to sit and think it over and decide his course of action, one that didn't involve risking his colleague's life preferably. It was a high speed corner incident that was outright stupid and dangerous, no amount of aggravation can justify that. He knowingly put Prost's life in danger, so I don't get it how you don't want to think of this as a cold and calculated move.
I was not in MS's head, nor were you for that matter. The first incident was pretty much him trying to block the inside line when he was ahead and botched it. Even Hill said he should have waited and pass later on. You can see foul intentions if you want, but I'd like to give the benefit of the doubt, thank you.
With JV he did it out of desperation, saw it getting out of his hands and did the move that he saw went unpunished at least twice before. But there is a difference of making a decision like this in the calm of your room the day before and right there in the race, even in the lap before as you say. You may not want to buy it, which is cool. I have never forgiven him for that move myself, it was stupid to say the least.
I don't think Shumi's attempt in 1994 was a botched block. He had damaged his car. And considering these guys are professional drivers and Schumi was not really a rookie, he knew he was not finishing the race. Hill saying that he should have waited doesn't change the fact that Shumi decided to attack Hill in the corner. His race was done. Now whether he was thinking of forcing Hill to crash on his own accord or he was trying to take him out is debatable as you mentioned, I was not there in his head. I would have still considered this as a one time mistake done in the heat of championship battle, however since he repeated this same tactic again I am not willing to give him the benefit of doubt. And the difference between Senna and Schumacher was that at least Senna confessed and mentioned the reasons for his actions. Schumacher never accepted his mistakes and never accepted that he did anything wrong. Which tells me one was a more emotional reaction and the other was a character flaw. As I mentioned in my previous post, if your first goto plan at the sign of losing is trying to take your championship rival out of the race, you have a character flaw and can and should be labelled a cheater.