MovieChat Forums > Senna (2011) Discussion > The two Senna and Prost accidents - whos...

The two Senna and Prost accidents - whose fault do you think it was?

posted 14 years ago by Superunknovvn
37 replies | jump to latest

The two accidents they had in 1989 and 1990 respectively (I think), were virtually the same. Prost went into the curve and hit Senna who was just about to overtake. Who's fault do you think that was? Senna's for overtaking at an impossible time or Prost's for cutting him?

Also, do you think the second time was somehow planned, sort of a revenge by Senna, to get back at Prost for what happened the previous year?

"We learned more from a three minute record than we ever learned in school"

[–] kimballtron 13 years ago

1989 - Prost, no question about it. Senna had clearly put his entire car inside, therefore it was no longer Prost's corner. What happened afterward was outrageous, disgusting. Senna had a lot of heart to come back to F1.

1990 - Senna had vowed to do as much if pole position were manipulated to the dirty side. But hey, he didn't merely crash into Prost's rear, but chose instead to race him. Maybe he was aggressive in staying next to Prost, but Prost moved wide well before the corner, then tried to close the door too late. By that time Senna had been so completely screwed over politically that there was no way he was letting that fly. I think no true champion is proud to win by racing dirty - but Balestre and Prost put Senna in a position where enough was enough. And as corners to crash out your rival go, turn 1 at Suzuka is safer than most.

The movie will definitely stay with you for a few days at least, and surprisingly I was affected not just by the 90-odd minutes of Senna coverage, but even the few words from Piquet (including some that you didn't hear on YouTube about the "f-up that happened to Senna in 1989" ha ha).

[–] gerbells2000 13 years ago

It's quite simple Prost deliberately crashed into Senna in 89, if you check the aerial footage its plain obvious.

Second one was Senna's revenge and rightfully so in my opinion.

[–] Scottishsage 13 years ago

1989 is obviously Prost

1990 is more than obviously Senna, mainly because he admitted it in 1991 in his tirade against Balastre at the Japanese GP press conference. One of the many things missing in the documentary because it might make our Saint look bad!

About 1989 couple of things, firstly the Senna/Prost animosity started in Estoril 1988 where Senna almost put Prost into the pitwall then was escalated with Imola 1989 where in Prosts view Senna broke an agreement. Neither were mentioned in the documentary. Secondly the real problem with Suzuka 1989 wasn't the crash per se, Prost wasn't very good at taking people out, but the aftermath and Balestre's manipulation. Senna should have that win.

About 1990 remember Senna was pole in 1988 and 1989 and started on the inside same as where he started in 1990. As for anyone that says that a crash into the first corner was 'safe' at Suzuka go look up Hitoshi Ogawa.

[–] dhydro_lics88 13 years ago

To be honest, I think the first one was unavoidable(or rather no ones fault in particular)... both drivers refused to open the door in a tough situation. Its sort of like playing chicken as they're both approaching the same racing line simultaneously.

The second time I believe it was a bit intentional on Senna's part. I dont believe he wanted a collision there, but rather for Prost to yield and run wide, making room for him to pass by. It was Prost's corner...

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] knifeparty2004 8 years ago

´89, Prost for sure. He basically turned right into Senna, way too early, it was obvious Prost took him out. Then the aftermath, was deplorable, Senna shouldnt have been DQ´d basically Balestre in DQing Senna was advocating drivers drive into oncoming traffic to complete the track.

´90. Complete and utter Senna revenge no question. He literally said they weren´t going to *beep* him again after what happened in ´89.

[–] pgFiSheYe 8 years ago

I have a broader view than everyone else in this thread.

In my view, both accidents were Prost's fault.

1989: Prost was leading the championship, and all he needed to win was Senna not getting any points at Suzuka. Senna's driving was dangerous yes, but either way, had he tried to pass Prost somewhere else, Prost would have probably crashed him on purpose. There is no way Prost was going to let himself be passed by Senna with the championship on the line. That's why he went crying like a baby to the race officials, as soon as he saw Senna kept on racing. He knew very well Senna was going to win the race (as he actually did).

1990: It's Prost's fault too. Had Prost not crashed Senna the previous year, Senna would have simply out-raced him, no question. Also, Prost had a huge influence on the pole line issue. Senna was on his own against the F1 politicians (including Prost). Senna took revenge yes, but only because his gears got pushed way too far. He even said it himself before the race: "I'm tired of these political races. Today, I will decide the way things will turn out. Today, it will be my way."