🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with Formula One would benefit from anything decisive during this championship battle involving Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved on the track rather than without resorting to team orders with the championship finale begins at the Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to team tensions

After the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a fresh start. Norris was likely fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate during the previous grand prix weekend. During an intense title fight with the Australian, his reference to a famous Senna most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“If you fault me for just going an inside move of a big gap then you should not be in F1,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to overtake which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap which is there then you cease to be a racing driver” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with the French champion in Japan back in 1990, securing him the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

Although the attitude is similar, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he never intended of letting Prost beat him at turn one whereas Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised even with the glancing blow he had with his team colleague during the pass. That itself was a result of him clipping the Red Bull driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; the implication being their collision was forbidden by team protocols of engagement and Norris should be instructed to return the place he had made. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to step in on his behalf.

Squad management and fairness under scrutiny

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 when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now covers misfortune, strategy and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question regarding opinions.

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

“It’s going to come to a situation where minor points count,” commented Mercedes boss Toto Wolff after Singapore. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I guess aggression will increase further. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated in the form of an on-track confrontation rather than a data-driven decision of circumstances. Especially since in Formula One the other impression from all this is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for their interests and it has paid off. They secured their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the fuss prompted by their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they possess a moral and principled leader 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 contest should be decided on track. Chance and fate will play their part, but better to let them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the team to determine if intervention is needed and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will intensify with every occurrence it is in danger of potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Already, following the team's decision their drivers swap places in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the shadow of concern of favouritism also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

No one wants to witness a championship endlessly debated because it may be considered 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 it's a developing process.

“We've had several difficult situations and we discussed various aspects,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately it's educational with the whole team.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal wriggle room left for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser to just close the books and withdraw from the fray.