@Imari It's fair when you mention that Senna used the "going for a gap" as an excuse for that particular occasion, and Senna was wrong, he knew that and appologized to Stewart himself later.
Exactly.
But him taking out Prost was in no means wrong.
Hold up. Lying about the reasons for what he did was wrong, but
actually crashing into another driver wasn't? Oh, I'm dying to see how you're going to justify this one.
Prost did the same to him in 89, was out of the race. Senna miraculously returned to the pits, rejoined and won the race. Ballestre unjustly disqualified him and gave the title to Prost, Ballestre himself admitted before his death.
Yes. And what Prost did in '89 was wrong also. What Balestre did was extra super double wrong, and I've already stated in this thread where I hope he ends up in the afterlife.
When you have the president of the FIA clearly favoring his french compatriot, did you expect Senna to simply bow his head and accept it as if it was nothing.
No. He absolutely shouldn't have just done nothing. But that's wasn't the only two options available to him. I expected him to fight it in the appropriate arena, against the appropriate opponent. Use the press. Use the fans. Use the driver's unions, or the safety reformers, or any of the dozens of other groups that would have been on his side in a fight against he FIA.
Don't take it out on other drivers on the track. They're not the FIA. Even if you accept that he had a reasonable grief with Prost, intentionally crashing him out on the first corner is incredibly dangerous and ridiculously childish. You did see the bit where a guy died in a very similar crash at that corner just a couple of years later, right?
We should be praising his attitude, he stood up against the system and won, for God's sake.
No, he really didn't. He proved that a broken system was broken, and that the FIA would let a driver win a championship even after intentionally crashing out another competitor on live television. I mean, how much more corrupt and unjust can you get?
He proved that he was a petulant child that would throw his toys out of the pram and risk the lives of others if he didn't get his way, no matter how justified his requests might be. Don't get me wrong, the FIA screwed him over well and good. It's totally not a justification for crashing into someone intentionally.
Max Mosley stood up against the system and won. He got rid of a large amount of the corruption and bollocks that was dragging the FIA down. Senna did nothing but sully his own good name.
Ron Dennis stated that Senna was so in disbelief after what happened in 89 that he had quit F1 and Dennis had an awful time trying to convince him back. He was simply not letting the same thing happen again.
As I've said, 1989 was wrong
as well. It's not a case of one being wrong and one being right. They were
both wrong. Prost should have been punished, and Senna should at best have had a minor penalty for going through the chicane but probably nothing. The championship in 89 should have been his.
None of that is justification though. There's nothing in the F1 rulebook that says for every time a driver crashes into you, you can crash into him. "He did it to me first" is not an excuse, especially not when you're playing with other people's lives. Most of us learn this as children. You apparently haven't.
And so I take it that you're cool with me crashing into you whenever stuff doesn't go my way outside of the game then? Good to know.