Post simply turned into the corner way to early. He basically side swiped him in a straight. If you look where Prost starts steering right you can easily tell he isn't aiming for the apex and Senna is alongside him at this point. Prost definitely deliberately caused the crash.Siao7 wrote:I disagree with this, I personally think that while Senna's was a horrible act, Prost's is more debatable if you want. I know that Prost was the thinker, the professor, but I do not think that he wanted to win the title that way; more like he wanted to show Senna that he wouldn't bulge to his bullish tactics, paid him in the same coin of "I'll put my car there and you decide if we will crash or not". There's a difference. I can't prove it though and frankly I wouldn't be surprised nor object to Prost getting penalised for the crash and eventually losing the WDC.mikeyg123 wrote:They both deliberately caused a crashed to win a title. Neither should have been allowed to win a title that way.Exediron wrote:I'm getting a sense of deja vu and I suspect we've argued this point before, but I think there's a major difference between the two. What Senna did was unacceptably dangerous, and openly motivated by revenge. No legitimate regulatory body would allow someone to win a championship that way.mikeyg123 wrote:Prost shunted Senna off to win a championship before Senna returned the favour. Had Prost been appropriately punished in 89 I doubt Senna would have felt safe to do what he did in 1990.
Senna's is only worse in the sense that it's higher risk but the precedent had been set the year before. Prost not only clearly tried to take him out but when that failed he got DSQ'd on a technicality. For something that had never even previously been punished. Yes, what he did was unacceptable but he was very heavily provoked. I think all of us would have had our judgement clouded by a sense of huge injustice had we been in Senna's position.
As for 1990, revoking his license was taken back. And I agree that the 1989 technicality was wrong; he should have been punished for being push-started. He obviously felt provoked by Balestre not bulging in his ridiculous demand to change the grid sides, something that he was fine the years before that. I've never seen a driver demanding to change something on a track to suit him, never before, never after. That was Senna being bigger than the sport itself and I am not sure how it justifies using his car as a weapon. It was a premeditated act, not red mist, I am not sure we ever had this before or after. He was provoked the year before if you want, but his retaliation put lives in danger.
But we are slowly getting off topic.
If he hadn't decided to do that I very much doubt Senna would have shunted Prost a year later merely over the starting grid positions. Not that I think it excuses it.
At the end of the day both should have been DSQ'd but if you do that for 89 you probably stop 90, 94 and 97.