🔗 Share this article

McLaren and Formula One could do with any conclusive outcome during this title fight involving Lando Norris and Piastri being decided through on-track action and without reference to team orders with the championship finale kicks off this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to team tensions

With the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful post-race analyses concluded, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a fresh start. Norris was almost certainly fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte toward his upset colleague during the previous grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight against Piastri, his reference to a famous Senna well-known quotes did not go unnoticed but the incident that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature to those that defined the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“If you fault me for simply attempting on the inside of a big gap then you don't belong in F1,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to pass that led to their vehicles making contact.

The remark seemed to echo Senna’s “Should you stop attempting an available gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

Although the attitude is similar, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. The late champion confessed he never intended of letting Prost beat him at turn one while Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his team colleague during the pass. This incident was a result of him touching the Red Bull driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, instantly stated that Norris gaining the place was “unfair”; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to give back the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that in any cases between them, both will promptly appeal the squad to intervene in their favor.

Squad management and impartiality being examined

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete one another and to try to maintain strict fairness. Aside from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now covers bad luck, strategy and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question of perception.

Most crucially to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists as fair and when their perspectives might split from the team's stance. That is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come a point where minor points count,” said Mercedes boss Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I suppose aggression will increase further. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as an on-track confrontation instead of a data-driven decision of circumstances. Especially since in Formula One the alternative perception from these events is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for their interests with successful results. They clinched their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by their drivers' clash) and with Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and upright commander who truly aims to act correctly.

Racing purity versus squad control

Yet having drivers in a championship fight appealing to the team for resolutions appears unsightly. Their contest ought to be determined on track. Luck and destiny will play their part, but better to let them simply go at it and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be pored over by the squad to ascertain whether intervention is needed and then cleared up later in private.

The scrutiny will intensify with every occurrence it risks possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris won, the shadow of concern of favouritism also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

No one wants to see a title constantly disputed because it may be considered that fairness attempts were unequal. When asked if he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“There’s been some difficult situations and we discussed a number of things,” he said post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal room for error for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser now to simply close the books and withdraw from the conflict.