🔗 Share this article

McLaren and F1 could do with anything decisive in the championship battle involving Lando Norris & Piastri being decided on the track rather than without reference to team orders as the championship finale kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath prompts team tensions

After the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and tense post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a fresh start. The British driver was likely more than aware about the historical parallels regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate during the previous race weekend. During an intense championship duel against Piastri, his reference to a famous Senna most famous sentiments was lost on no one but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing Senna's iconic battles.

“Should you criticize me for just going on the inside through an opening then you should not be in F1,” Norris said of his opening-lap attempt to overtake that led to the cars colliding.

The remark seemed to echo Senna’s “If you no longer go for a gap which is there you are no longer a racing driver” justification he gave to the racing knight following his collision with Alain Prost at Suzuka in 1990, securing him the championship.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

While the spirit remains comparable, the wording is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended of letting Prost to defeat him at turn one whereas Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he made against his McLaren teammate during the pass. This incident was a result of him touching the car of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, immediately declared that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; the implication being the two teammates clashing was forbidden by team protocols for racing and Norris should be instructed to give back the place he had made. The team refused, but it was indicative that during disputes of contention, both will promptly appeal to the team to step in in their favor.

Squad management and fairness being examined

This comes naturally from McLaren's commendable approach to let their drivers race against each other and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules over what constitutes fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers bad luck, strategy and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Of most import for the championship, 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. Which is when their friendly rapport between the two may – finally – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

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

Audience expectations and title consequences

For spectators, during this dual battle, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as a track duel rather than a data-driven decision of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the alternative perception from these events is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren are making appropriate choices for their interests with successful results. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they possess a moral and upright commander who truly aims to act correctly.

Sporting integrity against squad control

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall to decide matters is unedifying. Their contest should be decided on track. 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 analyzed intensely by the team to determine if they need to intervene and subsequently resolved later in private.

The scrutiny will intensify with every occurrence it risks potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Previously, following the team's decision their drivers swap places at Monza because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also looms.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

No one wants to witness a championship constantly disputed over perceived that the efforts to be fair were unequal. When asked if he felt the team had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but noted it's a developing process.

“We've had several challenging moments and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he said post-race. “However finally it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal room for error for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser to just close the books and withdraw from the fray.