🔗 Share this article

McLaren and Formula One could do with any conclusive outcome in the title fight involving Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri being decided on the track and without resorting to the pit wall as the championship finale begins this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts internal strain

After the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a reset. Norris was almost certainly more than aware of the historical context regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate at the last grand prix weekend. During an intense championship duel with the Australian, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature to those that defined Senna's iconic battles.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting on the inside through an opening then you should not be in F1,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to pass which resulted in the cars colliding.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “Should you stop attempting an available gap which is there then you cease to be a true racer” justification he gave to the racing knight following his collision with Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

Although the attitude is similar, the phrasing is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he had no intent of letting Prost to defeat him at turn one whereas Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he made against his team colleague during the pass. That itself was a result of him touching the Red Bull of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, instantly stated that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris should be instructed to give back the place he had made. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that in any cases of contention, both will promptly appeal the squad to intervene on his behalf.

Squad management and impartiality under scrutiny

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete against each other and strive to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents over what constitutes fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now covers bad luck, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there remains the issue of perception.

Of most import to the title race, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists as fair and at what point their perspectives might split from the team's stance. That is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come to a situation where minor points count,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I guess aggression will increase further. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will likely be appreciated in the form of a track duel rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Especially since for F1 the other impression from these events is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for themselves with successful results. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Racing purity against team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title appealing to the team for resolutions is unedifying. Their competition should be decided through racing. Chance and fate will have roles, but better to let them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the squad to ascertain whether they need to intervene and then cleared up later in private.

The examination will intensify and each time it happens it risks potentially making a difference that could be critical. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps at Monza due to Norris experiencing 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 looms.

Team perspective and future challenges

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated over perceived that fairness attempts were unequal. Questioned whether he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several challenging moments and we discussed various aspects,” he said post-race. “But ultimately it's educational for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal room for error for last-minute adjustments, so it may be better to just stop analyzing and withdraw from the fray.