🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and F1 could do with any conclusive outcome during this title fight involving Lando Norris & Piastri being decided on the track and without reference to team orders with the title run-in kicks off this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts team tensions

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and tense post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a reset. Norris was almost certainly more than aware about the historical parallels regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel against Piastri, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments was lost on no one yet the occurrence which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined Senna's great rivalries.

“If you fault me for simply attempting an inside move of a big gap then you don't belong in Formula One,” Norris said of his opening-lap attempt to pass which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

The remark appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “If you no longer go an available gap that exists then you cease to be a true racer” justification he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, securing him the championship.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

Although the attitude remains comparable, the phrasing is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended to allow Prost to defeat him through the first corner while Norris did try to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he made against his team colleague during the pass. That itself stemmed from him clipping the Red Bull of Max Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place was “unfair”; the implication being their collision was forbidden under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris ought to be told to return the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, both will promptly appeal to the team to intervene in their favor.

Squad management and impartiality being examined

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race against each other and to try to maintain strict fairness. Aside from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, tactical calls and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there remains the issue of perception.

Of most import to the title race, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists on fairness and when their perspectives might split with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when their friendly rapport among them may – finally – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It will reach a point where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes boss Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I suppose aggression will increase a bit more. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For spectators, during this dual battle, getting interesting will likely be appreciated in the form of an on-track confrontation rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Especially since in Formula One the alternative perception from all this isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making appropriate choices for their interests with successful results. They secured their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as team principal they possess a moral and upright commander who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Racing purity versus squad control

Yet having drivers in a championship fight appealing to the team for resolutions is unedifying. Their competition ought to be determined on track. Luck and destiny will play their part, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it and see how fortune falls, than the impression that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the team to determine if they need to intervene and subsequently resolved later in private.

The scrutiny will intensify with every occurrence it risks possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Previously, following the team's decision their drivers swap places at Monza because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear about bias also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to witness a championship endlessly debated over perceived that fairness attempts had not been balanced. Questioned whether he felt the team had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri responded that they did, but noted it's a developing process.

“We've had several challenging moments and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. McLaren have little wriggle room left to do their cramming, so it may be better to just stop analyzing and step back from the fray.