🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One could do with any conclusive outcome in the championship battle involving Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action and without reference to the pit wall with the championship finale begins this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to team tensions

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense debriefs concluded, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was likely fully conscious about the historical parallels regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate during the previous grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel against Piastri, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence that provoked his comment differed completely from incidents characterizing Senna's great rivalries.

“If you fault me for simply attempting on the inside of a big gap then you don't belong in Formula One,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to pass that led to the cars colliding.

The remark appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “If you no longer go for a gap which is there then you cease to be a true racer” justification he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with the French champion at Suzuka back in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

Although the attitude remains comparable, the phrasing is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he never intended of letting Prost beat him at turn one whereas Norris did try to execute a clean overtake at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his team colleague during the pass. This incident stemmed from him touching the Red Bull driven by Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place was “unfair”; the implication being their collision was forbidden by team protocols for racing and Norris should be instructed to return the place he had made. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that in any cases of contention, both will promptly appeal to the team to step in in their favor.

Team dynamics and impartiality under scrutiny

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete against each other and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents over what constitutes fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers misfortune, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question regarding opinions.

Of most import to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists on fairness and when their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. Which is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

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

Audience expectations and title consequences

For spectators, during this dual battle, increased excitement will probably be welcomed in the form of a track duel instead of a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Not least because for F1 the alternative perception from all this is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for themselves and it has paid off. They secured their tenth team championship in Singapore (though a great achievement diminished by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to act correctly.

Racing purity against team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall to decide matters appears unsightly. Their competition should be decided through racing. Chance and fate will have roles, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be pored over by the team to determine if they need to intervene and then cleared up later in private.

The scrutiny will intensify with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps at Monza due to Norris experiencing a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear about bias also emerges.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

No one wants to witness a championship endlessly debated over perceived that fairness attempts were unequal. When asked if he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“There’s been some challenging moments and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he stated post-race. “However finally it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal wriggle room left to do their cramming, so it may be better to just stop analyzing and step back from the conflict.