🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with Formula One could do with any conclusive outcome during this title fight involving Norris and Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without resorting to team orders with the championship finale kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath prompts team tensions

With the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful debriefs concluded, McLaren will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly fully conscious of the historical context of his riposte toward his upset colleague at the last grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel against Piastri, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes was lost on no one but the incident that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“Should you criticize 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 pass which resulted in the cars colliding.

His comment appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “Should you stop attempting for a gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” defence he provided to the racing knight after he ploughed into the French champion at Suzuka in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

Although the attitude remains comparable, the wording marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he never intended of letting Prost to defeat him through the first corner while Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty despite the minor contact he made against his McLaren teammate as he went through. This incident stemmed from him touching the car of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, immediately declared that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; suggesting that their collision was forbidden under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to give back the place he had made. The team refused, but it was indicative that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to step in on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness under scrutiny

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete one another and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now covers bad luck, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question regarding opinions.

Of most import for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists as fair and at what point their perspectives might split with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when the amicable relationship among them 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 Wolff after Singapore. “Then they’ll start to calculate and back-calculate and I suppose 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 likely be appreciated in the form of an on-track confrontation rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the other impression from all this is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for themselves with successful results. They secured their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and with Stella as team principal they possess a moral and upright commander 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 competition ought to be determined through racing. Luck and destiny will have roles, but better to let them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that every disputed moment will be pored over by the team to determine if intervention is needed and then cleared up later in private.

The scrutiny will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Already, after the team made for position swaps at Monza due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the shadow of concern about bias also emerges.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated over perceived that fairness attempts had not been balanced. Questioned whether he felt the team had managed to do right by both drivers, Piastri responded that they did, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several difficult situations and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal wriggle room left for last-minute adjustments, so it may be better to just stop analyzing and step back from the conflict.