🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with F1 could do with anything decisive in the title fight between Lando Norris and Piastri getting resolved through on-track action and without reference to the pit wall with the championship finale begins at the COTA on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout leads to internal strain

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and tense debriefs concluded, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. Norris was almost certainly more than aware about the historical parallels of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight with the Australian, that Norris invoked a famous Senna most famous sentiments was lost on no one but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined Senna'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 of his opening-lap attempt to overtake that led to their vehicles making contact.

His comment seemed to echo Senna’s “If you no longer go for a gap which is there then you cease to be a racing driver” defence he provided to the racing knight after he ploughed into the French champion in Japan in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

Although the attitude remains comparable, the wording is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he had no intent of letting Prost to defeat him through the first corner whereas Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his team colleague during the pass. That itself was a result of him clipping the Red Bull of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; the implication being the two teammates clashing was forbidden under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris should be instructed to return the position he gained. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to intervene in their favor.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete one another and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now covers misfortune, tactical calls and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there is the question regarding opinions.

Of most import to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists on fairness and at what point their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. Which is when the amicable relationship among them may – finally – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come a point where minor points count,” said Mercedes boss Wolff after Singapore. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I suppose the elbows are going to come out further. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For the audience, 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 regarding incidents. Not least because in Formula One the alternative perception from these events is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for themselves and it has paid off. They secured their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (though a great achievement overshadowed by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they possess a moral and principled leader who truly aims to act correctly.

Sporting integrity against squad control

Yet having drivers in a championship fight looking to the pitwall to decide matters appears unsightly. Their contest should be decided through racing. Chance and fate will have roles, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the squad to ascertain whether they need to intervene and subsequently resolved later in private.

The examination will intensify with every occurrence it is in danger of potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made their drivers swap places at Monza due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris won, the shadow of concern about bias also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

Nobody desires to see a title constantly disputed because it may be considered that fairness attempts were unequal. Questioned whether he felt the team had managed to do right by both drivers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but noted it's a developing process.

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

Six races stay. The team has minimal room for error for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser to just stop analyzing and step back from the fray.