🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with F1 could do with anything decisive in the championship battle between Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action and without reference to the pit wall as the title run-in begins at the Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath prompts team tensions

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and stressful post-race analyses concluded, McLaren will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was likely 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 well-known quotes did not go unnoticed but the incident that provoked his comment differed completely from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

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

His comment appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “Should you stop attempting an available gap that exists you are no longer a true racer” defence he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, securing him the championship.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

Although the attitude is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him through the first corner while Norris did try to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty despite the minor contact he had with his team colleague as he went through. That itself stemmed from him touching the Red Bull of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, instantly stated 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 give back the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that in any cases between them, each would quickly ask the squad to intervene in their favor.

Squad management and fairness being examined

This comes naturally from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete one another and strive to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents about what defines just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, strategy and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there remains the issue of perception.

Most crucially for the championship, six races left, Piastri leads 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. That is when their friendly rapport among them may – finally – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come to a situation where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes team principal Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess the elbows are going to come out further. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

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

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making appropriate choices for themselves and it has paid off. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (though a great achievement diminished by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as team principal they possess a moral and principled leader who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus squad control

Yet having drivers in a championship fight appealing to the team for resolutions appears unsightly. Their contest should be decided through racing. Luck and destiny will have roles, but better to let them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the team to ascertain whether intervention is needed and subsequently resolved later in private.

The examination will intensify with every occurrence it is in danger of potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made for position swaps in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris won, the shadow of concern of favouritism also looms.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

No one wants to witness a championship endlessly debated over perceived that fairness attempts were unequal. When asked if he believed the squad had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“We've had several difficult situations and we discussed a number of things,” he stated after Singapore. “But ultimately it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal wriggle room left for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser now to simply stop analyzing and withdraw from the fray.