🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with F1 would benefit from any conclusive outcome during this title fight involving Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri getting resolved on the track rather than without resorting to the pit wall with the title run-in kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout prompts team tensions

After the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and tense debriefs dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a fresh start. The British driver was likely fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate during the previous grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel with the Australian, his reference to a famous Senna well-known quotes did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence which triggered his statement differed completely from incidents characterizing Senna's great rivalries.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting an inside move through an opening then you should not be in F1,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to pass which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

His comment appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap which is there you are no longer a racing driver” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into the French champion in Japan in 1990, securing him the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

While the spirit is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him at turn one while Norris did try to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty despite the minor contact he had with his team colleague as he went through. That itself was a result of him clipping the car driven by Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that their collision was verboten under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris should be instructed to give back the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to step in in their favor.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race against each other and strive to maintain strict fairness. Aside from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents over what constitutes just or unjust – under these conditions, now includes misfortune, tactical calls and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Most crucially to the title race, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and at what point their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when their friendly rapport between the two could eventually – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come to a situation where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I suppose the elbows are going to come out a bit more. That's when it begins to become thrilling.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For spectators, during this dual battle, getting interesting will probably be welcomed in the form of a track duel rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Not least because in Formula One the alternative perception from all this isn't very inspiring.

To be fair, McLaren are making the correct decisions for themselves and it has paid off. They clinched their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (though a great achievement diminished by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Racing purity versus squad control

However, with racers in a championship fight looking to the pitwall for resolutions is unedifying. Their contest ought to be determined through racing. Chance and fate will have roles, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that each contentious incident will be pored over by the squad to determine if they need to intervene and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will intensify and each time it happens it risks potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made their drivers swap places at Monza because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. Questioned whether he felt the team had acted correctly by both drivers, Piastri said 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 said after Singapore. “But ultimately it's educational with the whole team.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal wriggle room left to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser to just stop analyzing and withdraw from the conflict.