Agreed. Tamburello definitely thinks that Senna is a reincarnation of Hitler. FACT.Quote:
Originally Posted by elis
Printable View
Agreed. Tamburello definitely thinks that Senna is a reincarnation of Hitler. FACT.Quote:
Originally Posted by elis
That much is apparent :)Quote:
Originally Posted by elis
And now we're well and truly derailed, aren't we..Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Perhaps this should be about Senna after all, and not a pissing contest between the Troll Coalition and the Anti-Troll Coalition? :)
There have been many good contributions to this thread. Actual memories and impressions, by fans (say, Jag_Warrior) and non-fans (say, BDunnel) alike. I don't agree with Tintop, in that I think there's no need to overlook Senna's faults in this thread, "a memorial thread on the anniversary of his violent death" though it may be.
But equally, I fail to see the value in a certain forumer's endless mantra of "Senna sucked", delivered at times in truly offensive manner.
So back to memories of Senna, perhaps? ;) Maybe even some new ones, from people who haven't posted here yet!
I see we have had a serious clash here. Separate threads are probably the best solution in this case.
Hmm... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by studiose
My "memories" about Senna derive from videos/books/articles as during his lifetime I knew nothing about him. So I don't have exact emotions or feelings about him and his racing. But all kinds of available information plus films of "The Right to Win" and "Racing is in My Blood" certainly create a very interesting vision of him. A person, who I'd have certainly liked to meet.
We all know his ruthlessness, but what is great, is that he tried to explain his attitude and racing philosophy as well as possible, making it quite comprehensible to me, so in the end there really isn't anything annoying about him. Only the situation at Suzuka '90 is for me, what I really don't approve in any way. Even Schumacher's antics and acts of desperation seemed more logical. But in the end - doesn't matter as so much time is past. We have had more interesting situations/characters in the sport and of course - more to discuss about. :)
Thanks Jens, that's a good contribution. :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by jens
About Suzuka '90... I think it was an act of a man who perceived that he had been grossly injusticed by the events that occurred before. The year before at Suzuka - in the title-deciding race -, Senna and Prost collided. Prost stepped out of his car, while Senna (with the help of marshalls) continued and - in his mind - won the race. Only to be prevented from going to the podium by the, then, FIA boss Balestre (a Frenchman like Prost, one might add), and later disqualified.
And in the qualifying for Suzuka '90 - another title-deciding race - it had been agreed before qualifying that the starting lanes would be switched, so that the pole-sitter would start from the clean side. Senna got pole and then, at the last minute, FIA's Ballestre decided that the starting lanes would not be switched after all...
And then Senna decided that if Prost, from P2, would get in front of him at the start, he would not "concede the corner"...
It was clearly wrong. I'm not saying it was right. But I hope you can see his reasoning for what he did...
----
Here's the thing in his own words.
[youtube]Fef6blfYvrw[/youtube]
Now that the thread has (rightly — for which thanks) been reopened, I hope studiose won't mind me posting a comment that I ended up sending him by PM, as the thread had just been locked before I finished typing it as a post.Quote:
Originally Posted by studiose
In response to the above, I certainly wouldn't class myself as a 'non-fan' of Senna. I continue to have the highest regard for what he did when he was at his best. Watching him in those circumstances was, as I said earlier, a privilege. Of those who came before Senna, I would put him (and indeed Prost) on a par with Fangio, Moss, Clark and Stewart. But, in my opinion, none of their careers were tarnished by one particular incident in the same way as was Senna's.
Indeed, and that's fair, I think. And I also wouldn't put Senna in the same class as a GP driver as, say, Fangio and Clark, because of the bad things he did on the track (as I also said in the PM to BDunnell).Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Sure enough, he had his reasoning and that's good (I'm still waiting, what has MS to say about his Monaco '06 for example :p :) . But in any case it's difficult to approve that deed as it seemed like a blatant revenge, which was largely led by emotions. But from his point of view, it was an 'easy' solution to the championship by using the "winning at any cost" concept. In this respect I think he was fortunate that we didn't have as strict rules then as we have now as I suppose it's highly likely a driver would get DQ'd from the championship after a similar manouver nowadays.Quote:
Originally Posted by studiose
I think that's right. But Senna was/is best characterized by the indomitable will/need to win, isn't he. More so than any other driver ever, I think. And occasionally, that indomitable will/need to win led to behaviour that just wasn't/isn't acceptable...Quote:
Originally Posted by jens
He probably couldn't help it - it was just a part of his nature he couldn't always control.
I don't think he was ever purposefully unfair/unsporting though. I really do think he was essentially a good man. Off and on the track.. It's just that his very strong emotions sometimes got the better of his very strong mind...
I love it how some (mostly prost/ferrari) fans cry about Suzuka 1990, but omit to mention how that little bitch prost tried to ram out Senna the year before at the same race and when he couldnt do it properly, he had to get his asshole friend Balestre to finish the job for him. I personally, after the treatment Senna had at Suzuka both of these years, would have done the same he did, floored it and made sure Prost was out of the race. In fact, I remember myself laughing and being quite happy about what Senna did, justice was done.
As for the irvine incident, I would have hit him too, but I would like to think I would have made a better job of it and I doubt he would have ever been that arrogant again.
Who say what is acceptable and what is not?Quote:
Originally Posted by studiose
:rotflmao: :rotflmao: I am sure that saddened him greatly during his life that some internet nobody did not respect him.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
Hilarious stuff.
I do not think that any true motor racing enthusiast should ever be pleased to see something like that happen, no matter what one's allegiance might be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
Why bother offering any opinions on here, then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
DANIEL.
Whoo-hoo, Way to go little boy :rolleyes: Listen up & listen up good.
DO NOT change other peoples comments, to amuse yourself, when you quote them, it does NOTHING but show up a frankly pathetic arrogance, akin to that of your buddy tamburello.
The very fact that Hitler was brought up in ANY context in a motorsport forum shows abject crassness to the hilt by it's very inclusion, plus knowing as we do, the posters personal opinion of Senna, the fact that he elected to make a Hitler reference when in the Remembrance thread was hardly an 'innocent' move, & no matter what the wording anyone with half a nouce could deduce the implication.
imo
I was not a fan of Senna, although I have to admit I greatly admired his will to succeed and his "only winning counts" mentality.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
I just thought it was justice that was done to Prost after the stunts he and Balestre pulled in 1989 and 1990.
I dont think that makes me any less or more a racing enthusiast.
I fail to see the relevance of what you said.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
I'm afraid I do, because I don't think that there is any room in motorsport for retribution in that way, especially in circumstances that could have been highly dangerous (unlike the tangle between Senna and Prost the previous year, which was probably unnecessary, but extremely mild). I also do not believe there is any actual evidence for the 'French conspiracy' that you described.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
What is wrong with tamburello saying that Senna lost his respect in that way? That statement was no different to your comment above about Irvine having been arrogant towards Senna. I could just as easily have responded to that, or any of the other opinions you or anyone else expresses, in the same way as you responded to tamburello.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
You're speaking about Senna or yourself? Help me out here.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
I am sure you will not be very greatly surprised when I say that I really am not even in the slightest bothered by that.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Why are you not attacking prost then? After all, his desire to get one back at Senna was the cause behind the crash in 1989, because Senna had him his bitch the previous 2 seasons.Quote:
because I don't think that there is any room in motorsport for retribution in that way
Yes, it was dangerous for sure, but motor racing is dangerous.Quote:
especially in circumstances that could have been highly dangerous (unlike the tangle between Senna and Prost the previous year, which was probably unnecessary, but extremely mild).
I am not saying what Senna did was right, but it has been overblown as an incident, when there have been so many dangerous other accidents, but they seem to be completely overlooked.
Did Balestre not actually confess to helping Prost? In any case, one has to be quite naive to think Senna was given fair treatment by Balestre.Quote:
I also do not believe there is any actual evidence for the 'French conspiracy' that you described.
Tamburello said that Senna never earned his respect and it speaks volumes about how importantly he views himself. I find that hilarious.Quote:
What is wrong with tamburello saying that Senna lost his respect in that way? That statement was no different to your comment above about Irvine having been arrogant towards Senna. I could just as easily have responded to that, or any of the other opinions you or anyone else expresses, in the same way as you responded to tamburello.
Hyperbole is often just something that makes those of a certain intellectual level believe that they have hit an ace. Usually I encounter those who bring up the Nazis or Hitler on political boards. That someone would bring it up here is rather telling... sad, but telling.Quote:
Originally Posted by elis
Whether I agree with someone or not, I believe that everyone is entitled to an opinion. It's the explanation of the opinion that often makes things interesting. With some people, if you let them talk long enough, they will make your point for you. At some base level, their opinion might be valid. But the roadmap they used to get there probably looks like a deep fried pretzel. IMO, some people are making very valid points in regard to Senna (positive and negative). And some... well... maybe time to come out of the deep fryer.
As a kid I was a huge Senna fan, but whilst I witnessed some of the dubious actions which have been commented on in this thread I did not understand the rights and wrongs of those actions until I was much older when I discovered the facts behind what I had just see as accidents as a child.
Learning the reasons behind the actions did colour my memories of Senna's career slightly but I still remember him as one of the greatest to sit behind the wheel.
So in answer to the original question. Was he a sportsman - yes. Of the highest order. Was he sporting? - no. He opperated on his own laws and views of right and wrong which I can't agree with.
Very well put, if I may say so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
@jag_warrier, yah I did make reference earlier to tamburello that he was entitled to his opinion.. Opinions are what makes forums 'interesting' when you realise how um, 'diverse' some of them are, but in the big scheme of things.. who reeeeally at the end of the day, gives a toss about what anyone else on a pretty insignificant forum thinks! ;)
Aaaaanyway, back to the MOTORSPORT matter at hand.
If Senna was not deemed to be a sportman then I assume the same can be said for Schumacher, who was found guilty of deliberately taking out Villenueve & was subsequently stripped of all his points for the season. He also had a dubious incident with Hill, & was in the 2000 season widely criticised by his fellow competitiors for his aggressive tactics, then the MC 'stall' quali melarkey. Good sporting conduct?
In the past Alonso has been punished by stewards for unacceptable & dangerous driving. Good sporting conduct?
In 2008 Hamilton was also criticised for his overly aggressive driving style, forcing a few opponants way wide in moves that could be deemed as unsporting. He blatently lied to the race stewards.. good sporting conduct?
They are all sportmen who have at times been unsporting.
It seems that rightly or wrongly most of the world champions of latter years have all shared that same streak, a ruthless need to win & woe betide anyone who gets in their way. Do we casually dust their misdeeds under the rug, well until they're dead at least, then we'll casually forget all the positive stuff, the amazing talent, the respect, uh huh.. the r-e-s-p-e-c-t, they did garner, only to focus on denegrating each of them purely on their indiscretions?
The reason Senna gets a hard time mainly surrounds the events of Suzuka '90, I see the sole reason is because he openly stated he would not yield, no matter what. This seems to be the sole basis for the slating. The fact that the likes of Schumacher, Hamilton or even Prost in '89 have never uttered such simililar/open words could lead to an element of doubt as to whether their actions had been 'intentional' or not.. only they truly know.
You cannot say that Senna is not a sportman, yet, Schumacher for ex. is, simply on the basis that one spoke 'honestly' about his intentions & the other(s) kept quiet.
Unquestionably the Suzuka incident was a sour point in Ayrton's career, but he is not, or rather should not be defined by that. He was a highly successful sportsman, respected by the majority of his peers.. who in the end are the only ones that are in a position to judge.
In my case, the reason for my dislike of what happened is the incident that ensued, not the motivation behind it, nor what was said afterwards. Personally, I do not consider any of the incidents involving Michael Schumacher, for example, to have been comparable in terms of their nature. But of course it is right to say that many a top sportsman has at some time or another been unsporting.Quote:
Originally Posted by elis
Why? We all saw it, and I would think that means we are in quite a good position to make our own assessments on what happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by elis
Would you give a politician the benefit of the doubt on the same basis — namely that their peers are the only ones able to judge the rights and wrongs of what they do?
Really? Would you care to elaborate on that?Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
I mean, at Suzuka '90, Senna thought he was right... Now, whether he was or he wasn't is a matter of opinion. In my view, the reasonable opinion is that he wasn't. But I could have understood his position at the time. (However, that doesn't mean I would have approved of him intentionally crashing into Prost in that first corner!)
Can you imagine Schumacher thinking he was right at Jerez '97? Or anyone else thinking it was right, for that matter?
What I mean, in a nutshell, is that I don't think any other of the notorious incidents were as savage as what Senna did at Suzuka in 1990. Schumacher's collision with Hill was, in my opinion, unsporting, but it was a fairly low-speed chop. Jerez 1997 probably goes further in terms of defying rational explanation, except to say that it was probably born out of desperation at not winning, and the end result was nowhere near as violent as was what happened in 1990.Quote:
Originally Posted by studiose
Ok.
I judge these things mostly on the basis of motivation, I guess. That's why I think Suzuka '90 was far less bad than Jerez '97 (and even Adelaide '94).
Not that any of those were in any way good! :s
Heck, there sure are some fine toothed nit pickers around these boards ;) Sure we all saw it & can offer up personal opinions, not saying otherwise, my comment was more in relation to his peers, who imo are perhaps in a better position to perhaps truly understand or even relate to the situation first hand, given they & not us 'fans' are the ones behind the wheel making choices that sometimes come to fruitian & sometimes do not. Senna was an intense driver who on ocassion made poor choices, I think pretty much every drivers would relate to being in that situation at one point or other, but just wouldn't/didn't flat out admit to the judgement call so publicy... & hence still be paying for it some 19 years later at the keyboards of armchair critics.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Unsporting behaviour is just that, unsporting, no matter who the driver, if the thought is there & the action carried through, it is unsporting. imo.
Maybe what I'm getting at here is the fact that none of his peers indulged in anything quite as blatantly savage (it's the best word I can think of to use) as what Senna did at Suzuka in 1990. Like I said above, I can't think of any other incident that stands comparison in those terms, as opposed to the underlying motivation. One could also mention Estoril in 1988, a move on Senna's part that caused some degree of outrage at the time, because it was just not deemed to be 'the done thing'.Quote:
Originally Posted by elis
Sadly, you haven't earned any.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
PLEASE!! :rolleyes: don't make me ask you about SchM.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
Can somebody please dig out the youtube vid of the relevant Macau GP? Thanks.
Same comment as above. Ta!!Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
That manoeuvre was blown out of proportion because Prost spat out his dummy and threw his toys out the pram.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Schumi did the same thing to his own brother at the Nurburgring (2003?) and I personally found nothing wrong with it.
My estimation of Massa went up when he decided to overtake in Fuji last year inbetween Webber and pitwall/pitlane exit
Was he trying to frighten the guys hanging off the pitwall? :p :Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
Which probably shows that it had become acceptable in the interim.Quote:
Originally Posted by wedge
I'm gutted.Quote:
Originally Posted by tintop
Oh yes, very clever....did you think of that yourself or did Mummy help you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior
Good for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
Anyone would think your opinion was more important than an internet nobody....oh, wait, you are one too.
That really is hilarious.
Schumi was a right txxt too. I wouldn't expect his repeated unsporting acts to be air-brushed or not mentioned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
His saving grace for me was that he was a txxt in a scarlet car.
Ah well, as my grandfather would say - GRHS - 'you can't polish a turd'Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello