Suzuka 89

[lavila30]

Why the hell FIA didnt punish Prost for hiting his car on Senna's car?

[ulissesq]

Senna was far behind Prost that year. Even if he wasn't disqualified in Suzuka, he would still need to win the last race in Australia, which he did not. Senna finished that season 21 points behind Prost. And in 1988, Prost scored 11 points more than Senna, but at that time the driver with most points was not necessarily the champion, so Senna got that one. Prost beat Senna point by point each season they were teammates, outscoring Senna by 32 points combined. Prost deserved that championship.

[lucianoestivill]

ALL SAID. Being the Senna fan I was, I am and I'll ALWAYS be, this 89 championship NEVER belonged to Senna. Prost led Senna in 14/16 races in the championship scores so... For something can be robbed firstly it has to belong to you, and 89 season NEVER belonged to Ayrton. In regard to the race itself, surpringsinly, it was Prost's race, Ayrton never managed to do a single move on Prost in almost all race (47 laps), apart from his optimistic manoeuvres. The season and the race belonged to Alain.

[shoemichael]

Prost had a way better setup than Senna and so he pulled away from Senna but Senna somehow managed to catch up again, Prost wasn't defending well and left a gap which Senna was entitled to go for, but Prost realizing he made a mistake shut the door. It was a very unfair move by Prost. But what Senna did the year after was very very bad.

Prost won in 1989 because of consistency and better reliability it has to be said. Perhaps Prost looked after his car better than Senna did.

[shoemichael]

Prost had a better race set up than Senna and that is why he was faster during the early mid part of the race but somehow Senna drove like a mad man and caught up with Prost who left a gap which Senna went for. Bad defending from Prost who turned into the corner too early to block Senna. Senna did worse in 1990 though. Ballestre was on Prost side though

Prost was in 89 from consistency and reliability. maybe Prost looked after his car better than Senna, who suffered huge reliability problems.

[Juliocesarcrb]

O campeonato mais roubado e o campeão mais injusto da história da F1!!!!

Ayrton Senna do Brasil!!!!!!! For ever!

[luisitoloco80]

HE PASSED NANINI with a broken front wing !!!

He was undobtedly the best!

[amberiuxlt]

he changed the wing if you dont know. lol.

[bottochea]

Senna was not disqualified because of the push-start. He was disqualified because of bypassing the chicane. The rules that year said that if you miss the chicane for any reason, you have to go back and enter the track where you missed the chicane. That is why Senna is telling track workers to push him back. Senna earlier asserted that this was a stupid rule, created graver danger and that assertion is backed by most of the other drivers following year during the driver briefing suzuka 1990.

[tiadaid]

But the FIA didn't help themselves in not blackflagging Senna immediately. They let him finish the race b4 telling him he had been DQed....

[derkommissar1917]

Senna was disqualified because Balestre wanted to make sure his countryman "won" the championship. If he'd turned back and made the chicane, they would have just DQ'd him for the push start, or for "dangerous driving", or for not speaking French. Or maybe something else.

[sargatanas88]

luciano, no fear, i will write you my point of view, unfortunately my mail program has deleted my letter when i was sending. I will write again. But this time using a text program...

[lucianoestivill]

yep sargatanas88, I received an e-mail from you but in blank, lol, no message there.... Maybe a problem on your e-mail??? No problem brother...

[lucianoestivill]

There's something that always happen again and again, and I don't know why: Everything Senna did was correct, but when others do the same things he did, they were cheaters, stupid, useless, slower, etc. When Ayrton closed the door to Mansell, he was right because Mansell didn't manage to overtake him yet. If Prost closed the door (not being overtaken) he's almost an assassin.....

[sargatanas88]

Senna in F1 made impossible missions, Prost was an excellent driver (especially with turbo-charged cars), but didn't let the people dream. In Japan they did kiss Sennas feet, he was considered a racing god. In Italy which is very much on the Ferrari side, he was a hero. Years later Prost admitted Senna was on a higher level.

Sure Senna did not everything right, but he was so great!!!

luciano, above you admit Portugal 89 was Mansell's fault?

[lucianoestivill]

Hey sargatanas88, I sent you a private message, please read it if you can!!! Thanks man!!! Luciano

[lucianoestivill]

I know Senna made impossible missions (no doubt,he did it many times), but so Alain did.Portugal 85,Donington 93 (just to talk about a couple of them, in fact the list is much longer...)was a demonstration that a driver can win and kick asses without the best car,but so was 1986 Championship,with a Prost winning his 2nd title to a couple of guys (Mansell and Piquet) who had the best car (specially engines) and also demonstrated an "impossible mission". A bad car,can win with the correct driver!

[sargatanas88]

well, i would add Interlagos 91, Suzuka 93, Kyalami 93, Monaco 92, Suzuka 88 and so on...

Senna had often to handle with car inferiority, relatively more seasons than Mansell and Prost. Ok, Alain's 86 season was pretty good (Williams was better) but he benefied from the bad Williams management. Unbelievable tactical mistakes in Adelaide did cost the tile. may i correct your ultimate message? a relatively bad car can win with the correct driver! in a Minardi even Senna could not do miracles.

[lucianoestivill]

I'll add to Ayrton list, at least the following 2 races sargatanas88: Spa 85 and Brazil 93. SUPERB!. But I'll take out from the list the following 2: Monaco 92 (he was lucky Mansell had a slow puncture) and Kyalami 93 (he just managed to keep Prost behind for 5 or 6 laps, but finally Prost overtook him and he was 2nd to Alain with a difference of more than a minute, with Alain also getting the Fastest Lap and Pole Position!!!). Maybe you wanted to say another race?

[sargatanas88]

luciano, i am bit surpised, you are an intenditor of motor racing, as i could understand from your "long letter" and now you are saying Monaco 92 was not great? Sure he was lucky BUT consider the car inferiority, he overtook Patrese in the first corner and pulled away, so one unbeateable Williams was already behind him before the thriller final. Kyalami93 bc. of power inferiority (100hp!) he nearly got Pole and took behind Alain for 18 laps, then the active suspension didn't work as its best.

[indigoblue555]

Hi ultimateforce -

Only 7 laps to go ? Well,he had to try -

Prost's trap did work!

So,Prost had been as fast as Senna all the race long if he was still leading at 7 laps from the chequered flag.-

anyw.two great champions so different fron each other but great -.

Greetings.

[gre812u]

Two f1 geniuses in battle with each other combined with the wonderful commentary of Murray Walker and James Hunt on top. It did not get much better than his

I miss those good old days!

[indigoblue555]

Curiously Prost didn't even try to restart after colliding...and his car didn't look damaged - am I wrong ?

[theultimateforce]

i think that Prost didn't restarted just because he thought that Senna was out of the race either and that he was the champion

[lucianoestivill]

Of course Prost didn't try to restart since it was an automatic disqualifying: push starts are allowed when is in dangerous position with no escape. Both cars where in dangerous position, but both couldn't restart since they were almost out of the chicane and with the safety place ahead. So the only possibility allowed there was: push start while they were still in the track, as marshals did with Ayrton car. Since his car didn't turn on (and now stopped on safety zone) no more pushing allowed.

[theultimateforce]

that's only your own interpretation of the rule, the FIA has never applied the rule like that because in that case Hamilton would have been DSQ last year at Nurburgring (in which he was lifted back of the track)

[lucianoestivill]

Of course. If we talk about rules, as lawyers talk about laws, you can have your interpretation on the matter, but the rules (or the law) is only one. If marshals have the interpretation that Hamilton was in a dangerous position, they didn't have to DSQ him. I agree in not DSQ in that case, specially due to the conditions in which that race was carried out.... It depends on the interpretation as you say...

[mattcrash69]

Prost and Senna both aren't dumb so everyone just lay off..it was just 1 of those things where the other guy thought he was right of way over the other.

[zuninomax]

Good try by Senna but Prost is the teacher.

[ilferrari]

I liked James Hunt as a commentator, but don't agree at all with him here. What Senna did was entirely correct and legal and Balestre stole the win from him.

[lucianoestivill]

It wasn't legal, push-starting once the car is on a safety area is NOT ALLOWED, and is automatic DSQ. On the other hand, it was Senna's fault: he had to win, he had to go for a major gamble, not Prost.. He did his gambling on that chicane, Prost cloosed the door (as Senna always used to do) and it's all over. Prost world champion, and a VERY DESERVED CHAMPIONSHIP, to be honest. Ayrton was a genius, but he sucked during 1989 season.... no way.... It was Prost race and Championship....

[ilferrari]

Senna was disqualified for missing the chicane actually, which is a joke considering the alternative route. Senna would have passed Prost just like he passed Nannini if Prost didn't decide to ram him while he was going past. Prost turned in WELL BEFORE THE APEX of the corner

[indigoblue555]

HI Ilferrari - if I correctly recall:

there were still 20 laps to go and Senna had no alternative:winning.

that was the first attack since the start:

they hadn't had a close fight till the crash.

Honestly Senna seemed to be caught in Prost's trap who let purposely the door open on the inside line.

Senna tryed hard in the wrong place:that chicane was so slow and allowed Prost cheating safely.

In a fast fraction of the track Prost could not match Senna who was sickly determined=

[theultimateforce]

there were 7 laps to go not 20 when the accident happened

[lucianoestivill]

What are you talking about my friend indigoblue555???. Prost was superior than Ayrton along the whole race that day.... Ayrton HAD to win (no option) and Alain WANTED to win... I mean, Alain was faster than him all the race, otherwise how can you explain that the driver who was in front all the race was slower than the second??? No sense....

[sargatanas88]

poor logic. if two drivers all the race are together it doesn`'t mean the guy behind is slower. it does certainly mean the guy in front is not faster otherwise he would pull away. So, why Alain didn`t pull away? Because he was not faster. The guy behind (Senna) was hold up by the car in front of him (Prost) or at least he had the same speed. Being faster and overtake are two different pair of shoes.

[lucianoestivill]

OK sargatanas88, it's good to find a man like you with your new physics theory, in which an object who run the same distance in less time, or run more distance in the same time, is slower or equal. I'll try to make a poll for changing rules so as the driver who came second was awarded with a win, and the one who is 1st be declared "looser". Has anybody seen an average speed faster on a second position than in the first. Cool. You're a revolutionary F1 fan!!!. Thanks brother!!!.

[sargatanas88]

again, luciano, what's going on? I did not talk about average speed. I simply did analize your asssertion "Alain was faster than him all the race, otherwise how can you explain that the driver who was in front all the race was slower than the second???" It happens that a faster driver is second because he cannot overtake. In that case average speed is slightly slower, but your argumentation was based on potential speed. Otherwise the driver who finishes first has in any case deserved to win.

[lucianoestivill]

sargatanas88, during that race Alain was in front ALL THE TIME, he outpace Senna for 1/3 of the race, and was always ahead of him!!! I don't know why Prost had to let Senna overtake him!!! Even a fast and fightful driver like James Hunt (listen to him on the video) said that Senna cannot go for it on the inside ina very slow chicane, something is ABSOLUTELY true!!! Prost didn't let him pass, but Senna could have braked as well, and didn't do it!!! A 50/50% for each other to blame!!!

[sargatanas88]

i did not say Prost had to let him overtaken. I said Prost capitalized the start and than Senna, which seemed slightly faster, was in a difficult position. In Suzuka overtakting is extremly difficult. I admit Prost did much more better than in qualifying when he probably did not push as hard as he could. Anyway, Senna had a slower pit stop and closed the gap. In R130 (the corner before the chicane) he was quicker than Alain and had to prove. After all, it was 1 meter missing. Believe it or not.

[lucianoestivill]

Niki Lauda,not a friend of Prost,said:"Why should Prost let Senna pass without a fight?Alain drove the normal fight-line,not zig-zag,we know that from Patrese.Alain did not at all drive unfair,the driver who is behind the other is always guilty at accidents.Prost is absolutely innocent!" I'm inclined to believe Hunt's or Lauda's opinion rather than you (or even myself!!!). When Ayrton go for it, Alain was running by the correct line, so he had just to turn to avoid the overtaking! He did! OVER!

[lucianoestivill]

If you want to analyse facts, it doesn't matter at all who was "the faster" driver in F1. That's a controversial thing, even tough I believe Senna and Fangio were maybe the best drivers ever, I don't agree at all when we talk about "speed", because even Alain recognized Ayrton was better than him on one single lap, but in a race, things are much more different... Watch this race from Ayrton's "camera car" and see how hard he pushed the whole race trying to catch Alain!!!

[lucianoestivill]

The fact, my beloved sargatanas88, is that Prost pulled away and by the middle of the race had even disappear from Ayrton's sight in some parts of the circuit... By the end, with a COMPLETE domination by Prost along the WHOLE RACE, Alain just slowed down, controlling his pace. In fact, Ayrton's overtaking manoeuvre was the one and the only he made in the WHOLE race. Maybe you watched a TV biography of Orson Wells that day, but not that race, wrong TV Channel!!!. Be careful next time!!!

[ilferrari]

Senna lost the 1989 championship mostly because his car broke down several times when he was leading races, and because of this.

[indigoblue555]

HI! Looking back to those years Prost had a better management of the race.Senna was hand down faster on the lap but in the race the gap did get slighter as Senna driving did overstress the mechanic.Post driving much smoother,had better results on the long term besides avoiding excess.risks=

[joshb1992]

have u seen the footage on prosts car though? he turns in to him

yes its optimistic but if u see footage u will see

[BritneySpearsRox]

Only thanks to Senna's death Schumi was able to become the world champion in 94 and 95.

Real champions: Senna, Mansell, Kimi Raikkonen, Fernando Alonso

[gre812u]

If you disregarding Prost by not calling him a real champion then you are obviously an idiot.

The guy could have been an 8 time world champion when F1 was at its peak in talent and Senna himself admitted that he was an incredible driver.

He pissed all over Mansell at Ferrari and would have done the same against Kimi & Alonso anyday

Senna is regarded as the fastest driver of all time & Prost was dicing with him for every race & championship. That says something!

[lucianoestivill]

I agree gre812u, Prost was a real master, as Senna also was... I think this stupid fights trying to be on Senna's side or Prost's side is useless and even stupid. Both had the same rate of wins in F1: 25% each other. In fact, Prost had a little bit more rate, some 2/10 or 3/10, almost the same. Different styles, similar results...

[chrisninety1]

Perhaps it's true that Schumacher wouldn't have been world champion in 94 and 95 had Senna not died (although even if he'd walked away from the crash in Imola, I think a 30 point deficit would have been a bit much to close up to, even that early in the season, even for Ayrton Senna in 1994) but how does that make Schumacher any less capable than he was? He won several other world titles fair and square - and no, only about half his title haul came when he was in the best car, before you say.

[sargatanas88]

sometimes an astonishing race has not the result it deserves. It's the case of Silverstone 85, Nürburgring 85, Suzuka 87, Canada 89, Monza 89, Mexico 90, Australia 90, Monza 91, Suzuka 91, Spa 92, Australia 92, Kyalami 93, Portugal 93.

[chrisninety1]

I'd say in next to none of those races you've listed there was the winner undeserving. Most weren't that astonishing either.

[lucianoestivill]

I agree brother.....

[lucianoestivill]

I agree chrisninety1, I asked to myself: who were the deserved winners of those races and why? Any real fact in regard to time laps, gaps, mistakes, "undeserved" failures (failures are part of motor racing), controversial DSQ? I don't see undeserved winner in almost all of those races....

[sargatanas88]

so Nelson Piquet is deserved winner of Montreal 91? Schumacher of Spain 01? Piquet of Hungary 87? Piquet of Suzuka 90? Schumacher of Austria 02? Irvine of Australia 99? Herbert of Monza 95?

[lucianoestivill]

By the way: Ayrton was the deserved winner in German GP 1990? He benefited from Prost gearbox problem (he lost last gear).... but I'm sure if it was Ayrton the one who won, he deserved, he's the only one deserved every race he won, lol.... I don't agree... I'm a fan of both Alain and Ayrton, but disregarding his opponents, specially Prost, is a way to disregard Ayrton.... Ayrton without Prost would have been nothing, Prost without Senna would have been nothing too...

[sargatanas88]

you probably mean Germany1989 when infact sixth gear on Alain's car broke. Considering the circumstances i would say Senna did deserve that win: he was on pole, he was the fastest man and only a terrible pitstop catched him behind (did last over 20 sec!) When the failure happened on the McLaren no. 2 ( 3 laps to go) Senna was still in charge (only 1 sec. behind) and able to win. I can't guarantee if he would haven been successful, but that was a completely different situation from those above.

[lucianoestivill]

LOL I meant Germany 1989, wrong year lol, for me Ayrton was the deserved winner since he was there when Alain had problems with direct shift, so it's OK, deserved. But if Alain hadn't have those problems, he would be the deserved winner also.

[sargatanas88]

if Alain didn't have that problem, who knows how the race was going to end? Maybe Senna was able to overtake, maybe not. I tend to the first option. It's a shame we didn't see the hot final on that duel.

[lucianoestivill]

I agree chrisninety1: why undeserved winners? Why Silverstone 85, why Canada 89 (Boutsen managed to finish under a heavy race)?, why Monza 89 (Ayrton had 2 cars for that race and Alain only 1 but Ayrton broke his engine)? why Mexico 90 (Alain won after having started from 13th place!!! Ayrton was called to pits due a slow puncture but he didn't want go to pits...)?, why Australia 90 (Nelson didn't make mistakes while Ayrton crashed like a noob with 25sec. ahead)?

[sargatanas88]

Boutsen in Canada 89 was very lucky, 3 laps to go and Sennas engine broke down. Same thing in Monza, where Prost benefied. Mexico90was a race the Mclaren crew lost, in the middle of the race they could have called him in and he still would have kept the lead, but so they rovined a dominated race. In Australia 90 Ayrton said he had a gearbox problem so it was impossible to enter 3rd gear.

[lucianoestivill]

It's always the same: if the one who wins is Ayrton, is OK!!! If the looser is Ayrton, it just for "bad luck". In regard to Mexico 90, McLaren called Ayrton to enter (in fact Senna was the one who told them by radio he had a slow puncture) by Ayrton refused. In Adelaide 90, he was leading since he had the best car, nothing spectacular... In Montreal 91, Nelson was not the deserved winner, but he got it since Mansell was miles ahead and didn't slow, consuming his fuel in the final lap...

[sargatanas88]

Nelson that day benefied from 3 failures in front om him: Senna, Prost, Mansell. Sure he had not the best car, but he was miles away. Well, on that we agree.

Best car is relative. In 90 McLaren suffered a lot with Ferrari better on fast tracks. In Adelaide with his tight corners car played a minor role. By the way, where was Berger?

[theultimateforce]

Mansell didn't finished fuel at Montreal, it was an eletrical failure who stopped him

[lucianoestivill]

Are you sure??? Or did he run out of fuel in the last lap after beating his own lap records time and time again???

[theultimateforce]

that's what the Williams team told at the time

[imola94]

I'm preety sure Nigel retired from the Montreal race in '91 coz he switched the car off.

[lucianoestivill]

Kyalamy 93? Prost won by more than a minute from Ayrton!!! By the way, Alain also got Fastest lap and the Pole... Portugal 93? There Schummi won, he kept Alain behind with his inferior Benetton.... totally deserved winner!!!. Australia 92? Who deserved the victory? Schummi? Why? What did Berger wrong that race? He deserved it....

[schopfheim91]

If Senna's move was too opportunistic, Prost could let him past and Senna would go off anyway.

[boxerevolution]

senna overtake nanini in the same place,with the same style.

[schuf1]

Fully Senna's fault. It was simply a desperate move and he would never have made it.

[Sylar962]

Although Senna´s move was kinda desperate, the video shows clearly Prost´s intention. The proof is there: Senna overtook Nanini in the very same place and nothing happened. Just because the italian would have no gain if he came outta the race. On the contrary: with Senna´s desqualification, he won the grand prix. In 1990, Prost had the payback.

[ftrudge]

Prost was an idiot

[Sylar962]

I´m sorry to tell you Prost knew exactly what he was doing. Senna could only have the championship if he won the race. With both out, the Frenchman knew he would be the champion. He had the race under control until Senna tried that desperate move. Prost not only threw his car on Senna´s but also put the car in 1st gear to be assured Senna wouldn´t go back the race. Although I don´t like cheating, Prost had what he deserved in the folowing year.

[derkommissar1917]

I'll never understand why Prost just didn't let him go, and then re-pass Senna on the next straightaway. He was much faster on the straights; all he had to do was keep right behind Senna. Senna couldn't have risked a collision to stop the pass. Oh well. Jean-Marie Balestre...the real 1989 World Champion.

[helviolc]

daonap, you are right: I only had the numbers in my mind and forgot about the fact that only the best 11 results counted. I did not say though that Senna did not have a chance to win the championship. I just put in perspective that it seemed more favored to Prost, due to his more regular results. Senna was the best, though, and made it really clear in the 1993 championship.

[daonap]

Helviolc, you´re forgetting the discard rules of that era. Believe me: all Senna needed was three victories in the last three races, even if Prost arrived the three in second place. The championship was still being contended by Senna at Adelaide, as McLaren´s protest at FIA was not yet judged.

[helviolc]

continuation of post below....

In Adelaide, Senna would have to won and hope that Prost would get below 3rd (we will never know, since the race was stopped when Prost was second to a first Senna). But it seemed unlike that Senna would be the champion, but I still think he is the greatest ever.

[helviolc]

I am a fan of Senna and he is my personal idol. But 1989 did not look like the right year for him. He got to Suzuka with a disadvantage of 12 points to Prost, with 2 GPs left (Suzuka and Adelaide). Supposing he could had won Suzuka without hitting Prost (Prost's fault in the accident, no doubt about it), the difference would go to 8 points (assuming Prost would be second, which is very reasonable). continues above...

[schopfheim91]

I think Prost shouldn't have cut in because Senna never ever would have been able to take the corner.

[MagicAyrtonforever]

Exactly, Balestre/Prost Combo was a bloated cheating French connection!

[jlxp1960]

You know shit about racing! Desperate move by Senna my ass! It would be easy to Prost keep his car all inside the turn and Senna wouldnt be able to put more than a half of his car between Prost and the edge of the track. And da rules said: once you have put more than a half of your car after the rear wheels of your opponents car then the other car cannot be moved toward the edge.

[schuf1]

Yes, it was a deliberate and desperate move by Senna.

[Rickko8]

Anyone see the interview afterwards...

[schuf1]

Schumacher cheated, huh? Well, if that's the case, then Senna cheated as well. I say neither of them cheated but were great athletes.

[MagicAyrtonforever]

So Prost is the only driver who doesnt have mirrors fitted to his F1 car! They are there, so use them!

Mr Prost est le seul conducteur qui n'a pas de retroviseurs monter sur sa F1!!

[sonicmann23]

I think the problem is that they were both too stubborn.. Senna could have braked hard and let Prost in front and overtaken him later, also Prost could have let Senna in, but neither was about to do that, and so we have this result!

[Pirelli86]

I must say that senna did come from along way back, he possibly could have waited for another part of the race to pass prost. Although prost was a prick of a driver.

[ayrtonsenna1960]

look at the nannini/senns move thats what should of happed, prost knew he had Balestre to back him up.

[starstriker2010]

u can clearly see that prost entered into senna...senna had the inside..it's very similar to Schumacher Hill duel at Adelaide 1994...Prost took Senna out..not the other way...

[vikirad]

After their final duel, in Adelaide, in 1993, they shook hands and made up.

A few months later, one of the bearers of Senna's coffin was... Alain Prost.

[vikirad]

The 1989 and 1990 seasons both ended with a similar thing. Prost and Senna colliding. In 1989 Prost took the WDC, in 1990 the situation was the other way around.

These two drivers were wreckless against each other, because they were the most fierce rivals ever in F1.

[wak4life]

The first ever F1 race I saw, with Murray's comentating, Prost being a wanker, Senna the best and Mansell the bloody hero, hard not to be hooked!

[digitalmp3player]

that's why i sorta hate prost.

[Channy132]

fanboy alert

[v63asm]

Senna tente un dépassement impossible.

Prost doit prendre le virage, accrochage et Prost est champion du monde.

Complétement mérité!!!!

[vigneshprakash]

Mais non, sois pas francais aveugle. Prost est salaud sans doute ici. Excellent pilote, mais ce weekend, il est salaud.

[davedavid86]

Prost is stoopid

[wan7edPT]

He was disqualified because the FIA president was french and he wanted to defend his french piggy friend Prost.

Prost really is the professor... Schumacher is the student. They both are the most wreckless drivers I've ever seen.

[swood1989]

If Prost and Schumacher are the most wreckless drivers you have ever seen then you must have been watching Senna's career with your eyes closed.

[OWfan]

Alessandro Nanini must be so glad the FIA made the decision they did. His first and only win of his career.

[Luxic]

He should, but actually he doesn't... he always stated that it wasn't a real victory for him.

[pukilupukster]

Look how quickly Prost gets out, to show everyone and will Senna into thinking, "We're out of the race, it's over!" The cars are both on track in a dangerous spot. There was no shortcut. Senna says back me up, but they push him forward. This shows how the FIA started making up rules as they went along. It got rediculous.

[pukilupukster]

Nanini was beat and he did what Prost should have done, he fought for the same corner but gave it up when it was lost. Nanini was a good race driver, and it's too bad he got hurt. Cry baby Prost was beat and took Senna out to save the championship (They didn't call him the professor for nothing.).

[pukilupukster]

Senna Forever. Prost takes him out, Senna keeps fighting, gets a legal push, gets back in it, wins the race. Then they say he's disqualified because he took the long way around to get back on the track, and they give the championship to Prost. Shameful.

[Troggle84]

To me, it appears that Senna blew through a stop sign at the end of that runoff road. It was painted on one of the tire stacks. It was designed so that you didn't gain anything by cutting the course. DQ'ing someone for that is a bit draconian, though. I think he should have gotten a 10 second stop and go for that.

[rickydaze]

Going thru the escape road wud have been an offense if he had used it to gain advantage over any opponent,i.e. overtake anyone..Prost stalled and he received a legal push...Nothing to give a stp go penalty for...Blatant cheating..Shame on FIA