🔗 Share this article

McLaren and F1 could do with any conclusive outcome in the championship battle involving Lando Norris & Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without reference to team orders as the championship finale kicks off at the Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout prompts internal strain

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful post-race analyses concluded, McLaren is aiming for a fresh start. Norris was likely fully conscious about the historical parallels regarding his retort toward his upset colleague during the previous grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight against Piastri, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes did not go unnoticed but the incident that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing Senna's great rivalries.

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

The remark seemed to echo Senna’s “If you no longer go for a gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” defence he provided to the racing knight following his collision with Alain Prost at Suzuka in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

While the spirit is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended of letting Prost to defeat him through the first corner whereas Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty despite the minor contact he made against his McLaren teammate during the pass. This incident stemmed from him clipping the Red Bull of Max Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, immediately declared that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that their collision was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that in any cases of contention, both will promptly appeal the squad to step in in their favor.

Team dynamics and impartiality under scrutiny

This comes naturally from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete one another and strive to maintain strict fairness. Aside from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers misfortune, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there remains the issue of perception.

Of most import for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and when their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when their friendly rapport among them may – finally – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach to a situation where minor points count,” said Mercedes boss Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and back-calculate and I suppose aggression will increase further. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will probably be welcomed as a track duel rather than a data-driven decision of circumstances. Not least because in Formula One the other impression from all this isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for their interests and it has paid off. They clinched their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as team principal they have an ethical and upright commander who truly aims to do the right thing.

Racing purity versus team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title appealing to the team 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 analyzed intensely by the squad to determine if they need to intervene and subsequently resolved later in private.

The examination will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Already, following the team's decision their drivers swap places in Italy due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris won, the shadow of concern about bias also looms.

Team perspective and future challenges

Nobody desires to witness a championship constantly disputed over perceived that the efforts to be fair were unequal. When asked if he felt the team had managed to do right by both drivers, Piastri responded that they did, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

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

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