🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One could do with anything decisive in the title fight between Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided on the track and without reference to team orders with the title run-in kicks off at the Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath prompts internal strain

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses concluded, McLaren will be hoping for a reset. Norris was almost certainly fully conscious of the historical context of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate during the previous race weekend. During an intense championship duel against Piastri, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence which triggered his statement differed completely from incidents characterizing Senna's great rivalries.

“If you fault me for just going an inside move through an opening then you don't belong in F1,” stated Norris of his opening-lap attempt to pass which resulted in the cars colliding.

The remark appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “If you no longer go for a gap which is there you are no longer a racing driver” defence he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with the French champion at Suzuka in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

Although the attitude remains comparable, the phrasing is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him through the first corner whereas Norris did try to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised even with the glancing blow he made against his McLaren teammate during the pass. That itself was a result of him touching the Red Bull of Max Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, instantly stated that Norris gaining the place was “unfair”; suggesting that their collision was verboten by team protocols for racing and Norris ought to be told to give back the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that during disputes between them, both will promptly appeal to the team to intervene on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete one another and to try to maintain strict fairness. Aside from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules over what constitutes fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers bad luck, strategy and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Most crucially to the title race, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and when their perspectives might split from the team's stance. Which is when their friendly rapport between the two could eventually – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach a point where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes boss Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess the elbows are going to come out a bit more. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For spectators, during this dual battle, increased excitement will probably be welcomed in the form of a track duel instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Not least because for F1 the other impression from all this is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for themselves and it has paid off. They secured their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall for resolutions is unedifying. Their contest should be decided on track. Chance and fate will play their part, but better to let them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the squad to ascertain whether intervention is needed and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made for position swaps in Italy because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris won, the shadow of concern about bias also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. Questioned whether he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“There’s been some challenging moments and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he stated post-race. “However finally it's educational for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal room for error to do their cramming, so it may be better now to simply close the books and step back from the conflict.