🔗 Share this article

The British racing team 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 team orders as the championship finale kicks off at the Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath prompts internal strain

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and stressful post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was likely fully conscious of the historical context regarding his retort toward his upset colleague during the previous race weekend. During an intense title fight with the Australian, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed but the incident that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“If you fault me for just going an inside move of a big gap then you don't belong in Formula One,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to pass which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

The remark seemed to echo Senna’s “Should you stop attempting for a gap which is there then you cease to be a racing driver” justification he provided to the racing knight following his collision with the French champion at Suzuka in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

While the spirit remains comparable, the wording marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he never intended of letting Prost beat 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 made against his team colleague as he went through. This incident was a result of him touching the car of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; the implication being the two teammates clashing was forbidden by team protocols of engagement and Norris should be instructed to give back the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that in any cases of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to step in on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete against each other and strive to maintain strict fairness. Aside from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, strategy and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question of perception.

Most crucially to the title race, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and when their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. That is when the amicable relationship between the two could eventually – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess aggression will increase a bit more. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and championship implications

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will probably be welcomed as a track duel instead of a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Especially since for F1 the other impression from these events isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for themselves with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as team principal they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity versus squad control

Yet having drivers in a championship fight looking to the pitwall for resolutions is unedifying. Their competition should be decided on track. 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 squad to ascertain whether intervention is needed and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will intensify and each time it happens it is in danger of potentially making a difference that could be critical. Previously, following the team's decision their drivers swap places at Monza due to Norris experiencing a slow pit 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. Questioned whether he believed the squad had acted correctly by both drivers, Piastri said he believed they had, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“There’s been some difficult situations and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he stated after Singapore. “But ultimately it's educational with the whole team.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal wriggle room left for last-minute adjustments, so it may be better to just close the books and withdraw from the fray.