🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with F1 could do with any conclusive outcome in the championship battle between Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri getting resolved through on-track action and without reference to team orders as the title run-in begins at the COTA on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to team tensions

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and tense post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly more than aware about the historical parallels regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel with the Australian, that Norris invoked a famous Senna most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting on the inside through an opening then you don't belong in F1,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to overtake which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

The remark appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “Should you stop attempting for a gap which is there you are no longer a racing driver” justification he gave to the racing knight after he ploughed into the French champion in Japan in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

Although the attitude is similar, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. The late champion confessed he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him through the first corner whereas Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he had with his team colleague as he went through. That itself stemmed from him clipping the Red Bull of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; suggesting that their collision was forbidden by team protocols for racing and Norris ought to be told to give back the position he gained. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that during disputes between them, both will promptly appeal to the team to intervene on his behalf.

Squad management 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 be as scrupulously fair. Aside from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers misfortune, tactical calls and on-track occurrences like in Marina Bay – there is the question of perception.

Of most import to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and when their perspectives might split with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when the amicable relationship between the two could eventually – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach a point where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes boss Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I suppose aggression will increase further. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated in the form of an on-track confrontation instead of a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Not least because for F1 the alternative perception from these events isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for their interests and it has paid off. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and upright commander who truly aims to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus team management

However, with racers competing for the title looking to the pitwall to decide matters appears unsightly. Their contest should be decided through racing. Chance and fate will play their part, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, than the impression that each contentious incident will be pored over by the team to ascertain whether intervention is needed and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will intensify with every occurrence it risks potentially making a difference that could be critical. Already, 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 in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. Questioned whether he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

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

Six races stay. The team has minimal room for error for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser to just close the books and step back from the conflict.