🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with F1 could do with any conclusive outcome in the title fight involving Lando Norris & Piastri being decided through on-track action and without reference to the pit wall with the championship finale begins at the COTA on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout prompts team tensions

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and tense debriefs concluded, McLaren is aiming for a reset. Norris was almost certainly more than aware about the historical parallels of his riposte toward his upset colleague at the last race weekend. During an intense championship duel with the Australian, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes was lost on no one but the incident that provoked his comment differed completely from incidents characterizing Senna's great rivalries.

“If you fault me for just going on the inside through an opening then you should not be in F1,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to overtake which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap that exists you are no longer a true racer” justification he gave to the racing knight following his collision with the French champion in Japan back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

While the spirit remains comparable, the wording marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he had no intent of letting Prost beat him at turn one while Norris did try to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his McLaren teammate during the pass. That itself stemmed from him clipping the Red Bull driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that their collision was forbidden by team protocols for racing and Norris ought to be told to give back the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that during disputes between them, each would quickly ask the squad to intervene in their favor.

Team dynamics and fairness under scrutiny

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete against each other and to try to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules over what constitutes just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now covers bad luck, strategy and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question regarding opinions.

Most crucially for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and when their perspectives might split from the team's stance. Which is when their friendly rapport among them could eventually – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It will reach a point where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes team principal Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I suppose aggression will increase a bit more. 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 a track duel instead of a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Especially since in Formula One the other impression from all this is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for their interests with successful results. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the fuss prompted by their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to act correctly.

Racing purity versus team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall to decide matters appears unsightly. Their competition should be decided through racing. Luck and destiny will have roles, but better to let them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be pored over by the team to determine if intervention is needed and subsequently resolved later in private.

The examination will intensify with every occurrence it risks potentially making a difference that could be critical. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps in Italy due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the shadow of concern about bias also looms.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to see a title constantly disputed because it may be considered that fairness attempts had not been balanced. When asked if he believed the squad had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several challenging moments and we discussed a number of things,” he said post-race. “However finally it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal room for error to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser now to simply close the books and step back from the conflict.