🔗 Share this article

McLaren and Formula One would benefit from anything decisive during this title fight between Norris and Piastri getting resolved through on-track action and without reference to team orders with the title run-in begins this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath leads to internal strain

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and stressful post-race analyses dealt with, McLaren will be hoping for a fresh start. The British driver was almost certainly more than aware about the historical parallels of his riposte toward his upset colleague during the previous grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight 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 from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“If you fault me for just going on the inside through an opening then you don't belong in Formula One,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to overtake that led to 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” justification he gave to the racing knight after he ploughed into Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, securing him the championship.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

Although the attitude is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended to allow Prost to defeat him through the first corner while Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he had with his McLaren teammate as he went through. That itself was a result of him touching the Red Bull of Max Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was forbidden by team protocols for racing and Norris ought to be told to return the position he gained. The team refused, but it was indicative that during disputes of contention, both will promptly appeal the squad to intervene on his behalf.

Team dynamics and impartiality being examined

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete against each other and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, strategy and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there is the question of perception.

Most crucially for the championship, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists on fairness and at what point their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when their friendly rapport 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 Toto Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess aggression will increase a bit more. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For spectators, during this dual battle, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as an on-track confrontation rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the alternative perception from these events isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for themselves and it has paid off. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as team principal they possess a moral and principled leader who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title appealing to the team for resolutions appears unsightly. Their contest ought to be determined through racing. Luck and destiny will have roles, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the team to determine if they need to intervene and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will increase 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 at Monza due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also emerges.

Team perspective and future challenges

No one wants to witness a championship endlessly debated over perceived that fairness attempts were unequal. Questioned whether he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“There’s been some difficult situations and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he stated after Singapore. “However finally it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal wriggle room left for last-minute adjustments, so it may be better now to simply stop analyzing and withdraw from the fray.