🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with Formula One would benefit from any conclusive outcome during this title fight between Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri being decided on the track rather than without reference to the pit wall as the championship finale kicks off this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts team tensions

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and stressful debriefs concluded, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a reset. Norris was likely fully conscious of the historical context regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight against Piastri, that Norris invoked a famous Senna well-known quotes was lost on no one yet the occurrence that provoked his comment differed completely to those that defined Senna's iconic battles.

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

His comment appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “If you no longer go an available gap which is there you are no longer a racing driver” justification he gave to the racing knight after he ploughed into Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

While the spirit remains comparable, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent of letting Prost to defeat him through the first corner while Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he had with his team colleague during the pass. This incident stemmed from him clipping the Red Bull driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, immediately declared that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; the implication being their collision was forbidden under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris should be instructed to give back the place he had made. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to intervene on his behalf.

Squad management and fairness under scrutiny

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete one another and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules about what defines just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now covers misfortune, strategy and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there is the question of perception.

Most crucially for the championship, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and at what point their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. Which is when the amicable relationship among them could eventually – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come a point where minor points count,” said Mercedes team principal Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I suppose aggression will increase a bit more. That's when it begins to become thrilling.”

Audience expectations and championship implications

For spectators, during this dual battle, getting interesting will likely be appreciated in the form of an on-track confrontation instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the other impression from these events isn't very inspiring.

To be fair, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for their interests with successful results. They secured their tenth team championship in Singapore (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Racing purity versus squad control

However, with racers in a championship fight appealing to the team for resolutions is unedifying. Their competition ought to be determined through racing. Luck and destiny will have roles, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the squad to determine if intervention is needed and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

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

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

No one wants to see a title constantly disputed over perceived that fairness attempts had not been balanced. When asked if he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several challenging moments and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he said after Singapore. “However finally it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal wriggle room left to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser now to simply stop analyzing and step back from the fray.