🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with F1 could do with anything decisive in the championship battle between Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri being decided on the track and without resorting to the pit wall with the title run-in begins this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath leads to team tensions

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses dealt with, McLaren will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly more than aware of the historical context of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel with the Australian, that Norris invoked a famous Senna most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed but the incident that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature to those that defined the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“If you fault me for simply attempting on the inside through an opening then you don't belong in F1,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to pass which resulted in the cars colliding.

His comment appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “If you no longer go an available gap that exists you are no longer a true racer” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with the French champion in Japan back in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

Although the attitude is similar, the wording marks where parallels stop. The late champion confessed he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him at turn one whereas Norris did try to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised even with the glancing blow he had with his team colleague during the pass. 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 gaining the place seemed unjust; the implication being their collision was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to give back the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, but it was indicative that during disputes between them, both will promptly appeal to the team to intervene on his behalf.

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 strive to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules about what defines just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now includes misfortune, tactical calls and on-track occurrences like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Of most import for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and when their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. That is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach a point where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I guess aggression will increase a bit more. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will probably be welcomed as an on-track confrontation rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Especially since in Formula One the alternative perception from all this is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making appropriate choices for their interests and it has paid off. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and with Stella as team principal they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity versus team management

Yet having drivers in a championship fight looking to the pitwall for resolutions is unedifying. Their competition ought to be determined through racing. Luck and destiny will play their part, but better to let them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense 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 examination will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Already, after the team made for position swaps in Italy due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris won, the shadow of concern of favouritism also looms.

Team perspective and future challenges

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated over perceived that fairness attempts were unequal. When asked if he believed the squad had acted correctly by both drivers, Piastri said he believed they had, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several challenging moments and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he said post-race. “But ultimately it's educational with the whole team.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal room for error to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser to just close the books and step back from the conflict.