Suzuka 1989, proof Prost took Senna out deliberately

Suzuka 1989, proof Prost took Senna out deliberately

Author
Discussion

freedman

5,395 posts

206 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
pw32 said:
Interesting and agree with this, I watched the video having not seen the incident for many years fair happy that Prost deliberately caused the crash, however watching your video I now think it was actually more Senna's doing. Sure Prost was over more, but that is a natural when you are defending a position..
I agree the fact he didnt move the car to the left as much as usual could be construed as just taking a more defensive line

However turning in 20 yards too early on a line that would take you totally off track had Senna not been there is something else all together

Derek Smith

45,514 posts

247 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
At the time a report I read pointed out (in the opiniion of the author) that the similarities between the two crashes between Senna and Prost was that the latter left a gap. Certainly at the first corner crash, Prost went to the left leaving a massive invitation to Senna. There were many suggestions that Senna could not have made the corner and if this was so, the author pointed out that Prost should have braked and let him go. If he could have made the corner then what was the problem.

The linked video shows clearly that Prost turned into Senna. I've not seen any sensible argument against that. This video just makes it clearer. Again Prost made a mistake in that he failed to damage Senna's car sufficiently to stop it running. That took Balestre.

Oddly, the errors of Prost are somehow pushed by some to suggest that his lack of skill in taking cars off should be in his favour.

That was a dreadful time in F1. Two drivers behaving in that manner. Whilst the sport needs personalities, including those that clash, the battle between these two was very dark. It wasn't that long after a similar falling out reportedly cost the life of one of the most exciting drivers the sport has ever seen.

On top of that we had Balestre in charge. Here was a man whose partiality wasn't even hidden. It was apparent in everything he did. He favoured one particular driver and made decisions that showed this time and again. Further, his poor management of F1 gave us threats of strikes by the teams and there were suggestions of a breakaway series. Further, there was photographic evidence that suggested nazi sympathies. Thank goodness he was replaced.

The video is very clever and well worth watching. Well done. However, it only proves what was accepted by most years ago.

Nick1point9

3,917 posts

179 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
weyland yutani said:
The worst thing about the whole incident wasn't Prost's unsporting behaviour but the ridiculous DSQ handed to Senna for "missing the chicane".
Missing the chicane and therefore not observing the racing distance, despite driving further...

OP we all know it was deliberate and that the FIA then punished Senna because Prost didn't do a good enough job of it.

oyster

12,577 posts

247 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
mattikake said:
REALIST123 said:
oyster said:
mattikake said:
From what I have seen around, there's a lot of people that still think it was just a "racing accident". Mostly idiots, noobs and youtubers etc. granted... but also quite a few I've seen on PH.

Maybe those people will keep quiet from posting this time?
Even if deliberate it was at slow speed and not dangerous at all. What Senna did the following year was 10 times worse and 2 wrongs don't make a right (although they did back then as they both won championships - albeit the wrong way round).
At least Senna told everyone he was going to do it.
...And why. Also Senna never denied it. Prost keeps doing so, even in a book as recent as Senna versus Prost.
Take the rose-tinted glasses off.
I'm a huge fan of Senna, but what he did in Japan 1990 was disgusting. If a driver was to do something like that now, regardless of previous aggravation, he would be banned for at least several races.
There is nothing honourable about giving advance notice of causing a deliberate high-speed crash.

Like I said, it's a shame the 2 crashes ever happened, as without we'd have had Senna as a double champion in 1989 and Prost with a much better remembered title with Ferrari in 1990.

DJRC

23,563 posts

235 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
Derek Smith said:
At the time a report I read pointed out (in the opiniion of the author) that the similarities between the two crashes between Senna and Prost was that the latter left a gap. Certainly at the first corner crash, Prost went to the left leaving a massive invitation to Senna. There were many suggestions that Senna could not have made the corner and if this was so, the author pointed out that Prost should have braked and let him go. If he could have made the corner then what was the problem.

The linked video shows clearly that Prost turned into Senna. I've not seen any sensible argument against that. This video just makes it clearer. Again Prost made a mistake in that he failed to damage Senna's car sufficiently to stop it running. That took Balestre.

Oddly, the errors of Prost are somehow pushed by some to suggest that his lack of skill in taking cars off should be in his favour.

That was a dreadful time in F1. Two drivers behaving in that manner. Whilst the sport needs personalities, including those that clash, the battle between these two was very dark. It wasn't that long after a similar falling out reportedly cost the life of one of the most exciting drivers the sport has ever seen.

On top of that we had Balestre in charge. Here was a man whose partiality wasn't even hidden. It was apparent in everything he did. He favoured one particular driver and made decisions that showed this time and again. Further, his poor management of F1 gave us threats of strikes by the teams and there were suggestions of a breakaway series. Further, there was photographic evidence that suggested nazi sympathies. Thank goodness he was replaced.

The video is very clever and well worth watching. Well done. However, it only proves what was accepted by most years ago.
Who are you insinuating he favoured? My recollections of the time was very much that Senna was the favoured golden child, he was the "franchise player" as the Yanks says. Balestre was loathed by all the drivers, fans and the teams. I dont recall either him or anybody arguing that Balestre ever favoured anybody or anything that wasnt about himself! Nigel Roebuck used to be absolutely scathing about him.

anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
John D. said:
johnfelstead said:
What's a youtuber and why is it a bad thing? lol
Go on YouTube and read some of the comments to a vid such as this. There's your answer wink
Thats not an answer, and as you go on youtube, doesn't that make you a youtuber? spin

Le TVR

3,092 posts

250 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
Fire99 said:
weyland yutani said:
The worst thing about the whole incident wasn't Prost's unsporting behaviour but the ridiculous DSQ handed to Senna for "missing the chicane".
yes Sadly Balastre made it far too obvious that he was discriminating against Senna. That was a blatant incident. As much as Senna was a pretty ruthless racer, he certainly appeared a fairly sensitive bloke within.

To be honest the whole Balastre saga would have boiled my wee too!
Watching it at the time, the interesting part was seeing Balestre watching the replay and it was when Senna got pushed back out by the marshalls that J-M jumped up shouting "illegal!" like a man demented. Not missing chicane of cutting into the pit lane.

Anyhow this all started in 84 , Sennas first ever F1 season, with the invitation race for the new Nurburgring. Prost qualified in front of Senna and Prosts race ended after a few corners. Senna already had years of "previous" prior to Suzuka 89.

pw32

1,032 posts

197 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
mattikake said:
NISaxoVTR said:
Most drivers take a different line when someone is closing on them to over take, I don't think that is proof positive that he had plotted to 'take him out' from the begining. I personally think he decided he wasn't going to be bullied/embarrassed by Senna and put his car in a position where he let Senna decide if they would have an accident or not.
Did you see the bit where Prost is aiming to turning onto the grass on the inside of the corner in the vid and continues to do so after contact is made? That is not a line where the decision to crash is Senna's. It's a line to make deliberate contact.

pw32 said:
Interesting and agree with this, I watched the video having not seen the incident for many years fair happy that Prost deliberately caused the crash, however watching your video I now think it was actually more Senna's doing. Sure Prost was over more, but that is a natural when you are defending a position. In my view (as a racer) with Prost positioning his car in that manor that would deter most people from trying to overtake as the move isn't on unless the other driver is willing to make allowances and avoid the contact. Senna should of, and i am sure did know but still went for it. Either way Prost held the cards and he stuck a move on him and ran out tarmac. Whilst I cannot remember the laps coming up to this I am sure there are better opportunities to make a move stick. All looked a bit amateur hour from Senna and desperate.

In my opinion whilst the video is good the evidence presented doesn't back up the case.

PS: For the sake of clarity I was never a big Senna or Prost fan.
I think you need to watch the video again then. The points I made are a fact of the evidence that appears absolutely only due to overlaying the frames - to the point that not even I expected to see what I found, as per the comments in the vid.

Some other facts;
- Senna never got as close to Prost in the entire race as he did on this lap (which annoys me as Prost could've won fair and square).
- There is more than a full car width between Senna and Prost, as Senna manoeuvers down the inside. Even with today's rules, this does not constitute a fair block.
- Senna's car was straight and true, fully on the tarmac. He did not run out of anything.
- "Should have".

You're a "racer"? No chance.
If you want to resort to insults I'm out. You don't seem to be able to accept someone may not form exactly the same opinion as you. Seek help.



John D.

17,706 posts

208 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
johnfelstead said:
John D. said:
johnfelstead said:
What's a youtuber and why is it a bad thing? lol
Go on YouTube and read some of the comments to a vid such as this. There's your answer wink
Thats not an answer, and as you go on youtube, doesn't that make you a youtuber? spin
Only to argue with stupid people wink

No I generally don't comment on YouTube, as if you think the standard of discussion gets bad on here its something else on there!

Derek Smith

45,514 posts

247 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
DJRC said:
Who are you insinuating he favoured? My recollections of the time was very much that Senna was the favoured golden child, he was the "franchise player" as the Yanks says. Balestre was loathed by all the drivers, fans and the teams. I dont recall either him or anybody arguing that Balestre ever favoured anybody or anything that wasnt about himself! Nigel Roebuck used to be absolutely scathing about him.
Perish the thought that I shuld insinuate anything. I'm saying it clearly: Balestre was biased.

For all that he was disliked there was never any doubt that he was an enthusiast for the sport, and left it in a stronger position than when he took over, something his replacement could never claim.

freedman

5,395 posts

206 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
DJRC said:
Who are you insinuating he favoured? My recollections of the time was very much that Senna was the favoured golden child, he was the "franchise player" as the Yanks says. Balestre was loathed by all the drivers, fans and the teams. I dont recall either him or anybody arguing that Balestre ever favoured anybody or anything that wasnt about himself! Nigel Roebuck used to be absolutely scathing about him.
How on earth can you suggest that Balestre did not favour Prost (TBH it could have been any Frsnch driver) against Senna?

His behaviour after the Japanese race which Senna won fair and square, his threat to ban him unless he apologised etc etc


freedman

5,395 posts

206 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
Le TVR said:
Anyhow this all started in 84 , Sennas first ever F1 season, with the invitation race for the new Nurburgring. Prost qualified in front of Senna and Prosts race ended after a few corners.
Prosts race ended at the chequered flag, he finished 15th, 39 seconds behind winner Senna

Vocal Minority

8,582 posts

151 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
Spanna said:
As much of a bd I think Prost was, he was still a truly great driver. What about the other Senna/Prost crash the following season?
Senna did it...so it's fine.

Some Gump

12,671 posts

185 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2012
quotequote all
Yeah? That video is fake. His boot should be in shadow, and it's not. Clearly it was shot in a studio, etc

Le TVR

3,092 posts

250 months

Wednesday 3rd October 2012
quotequote all
freedman said:
Le TVR said:
Anyhow this all started in 84 , Sennas first ever F1 season, with the invitation race for the new Nurburgring. Prost qualified in front of Senna and Prosts race ended after a few corners.
Prosts race ended at the chequered flag, he finished 15th, 39 seconds behind winner Senna
I guess starting on pole and then being punted off by Senna after a few corners effectively finished his race wherever he ended up at the flag.

DJRC

23,563 posts

235 months

Wednesday 3rd October 2012
quotequote all
freedman said:
DJRC said:
Who are you insinuating he favoured? My recollections of the time was very much that Senna was the favoured golden child, he was the "franchise player" as the Yanks says. Balestre was loathed by all the drivers, fans and the teams. I dont recall either him or anybody arguing that Balestre ever favoured anybody or anything that wasnt about himself! Nigel Roebuck used to be absolutely scathing about him.
How on earth can you suggest that Balestre did not favour Prost (TBH it could have been any Frsnch driver) against Senna?

His behaviour after the Japanese race which Senna won fair and square, his threat to ban him unless he apologised etc etc

Because Balestre and Prost loathed each other to the extent that Prost refused to talk to him if he could possibly avoid it! Balestre had threatened to revoke Prost's licence more than once. Senna once threatened (Balestre) to "kick him in the balls" I think was the relevent quote.

Balestre and Prost had way previous history between them long before Senna appeared. I think both Senna and Prost would have fallen over laughing if you had told them that Balestre favoured either of them.

vonuber

17,868 posts

164 months

Wednesday 3rd October 2012
quotequote all
DJRC said:
Because Balestre and Prost loathed each other to the extent that Prost refused to talk to him if he could possibly avoid it! Balestre had threatened to revoke Prost's licence more than once. Senna once threatened (Balestre) to "kick him in the balls" I think was the relevent quote.

Balestre and Prost had way previous history between them long before Senna appeared. I think both Senna and Prost would have fallen over laughing if you had told them that Balestre favoured either of them.
Sorry, this doesn't fit the Saint Senna/Evil Prost image. Please re-write and re-submit, and then report to Room 25 Sector 3G for reconditioning.

DJRC

23,563 posts

235 months

Wednesday 3rd October 2012
quotequote all
vonuber said:
DJRC said:
Because Balestre and Prost loathed each other to the extent that Prost refused to talk to him if he could possibly avoid it! Balestre had threatened to revoke Prost's licence more than once. Senna once threatened (Balestre) to "kick him in the balls" I think was the relevent quote.

Balestre and Prost had way previous history between them long before Senna appeared. I think both Senna and Prost would have fallen over laughing if you had told them that Balestre favoured either of them.
Sorry, this doesn't fit the Saint Senna/Evil Prost image. Please re-write and re-submit, and then report to Room 25 Sector 3G for reconditioning.
Its not really a Senna/Prost thing...its a Balestre thing. The man was a complete ahole!

The irony is most folk in motorsport and most fans/enthusiasts all rejoiced when Max was elected to oust him!

vonuber

17,868 posts

164 months

Wednesday 3rd October 2012
quotequote all
So what was Balestre's agenda?

28jaguar

197 posts

154 months

Wednesday 3rd October 2012
quotequote all
With the attitude Senna has, he brought it on himself in the first place.