🔗 Share this article

McLaren and Formula One would benefit from any conclusive outcome during this title fight between Norris and Piastri being decided on the track rather than without resorting to team orders with the title run-in begins this weekend at COTA starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts team tensions

With the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful post-race analyses concluded, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. Norris was likely fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte toward his upset colleague at the last grand prix weekend. During an intense title fight with the Australian, that Norris invoked a famous Senna most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed but the incident which triggered his statement differed completely to those that defined Senna's iconic battles.

“If you fault me for simply attempting on the inside of a big gap then you don't belong in Formula One,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to overtake that led to their vehicles making contact.

His comment seemed to echo Senna’s “If you no longer go an available gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” justification he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost at Suzuka back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

Although the attitude remains comparable, the wording is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended of letting Prost to defeat him at turn one while Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he had with his team colleague as he went through. That itself stemmed from him touching the car driven by Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, immediately declared that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was forbidden under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, both will promptly appeal to the team to intervene on his behalf.

Squad management and impartiality under scrutiny

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race against each other 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 includes bad luck, tactical calls and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there is the question of perception.

Most crucially for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists on fairness and at what point their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. Which is when their friendly rapport among them could eventually – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come a point where minor points count,” said Mercedes team principal Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I suppose aggression will increase a bit more. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For spectators, during this dual battle, getting interesting will probably be welcomed in the form of an on-track confrontation instead of a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Especially since for F1 the other impression from these events is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren are making the correct decisions for themselves and it has paid off. They secured their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the fuss prompted by their drivers' clash) and with Stella as squad leader they possess a moral and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Racing purity against team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall for resolutions appears unsightly. Their contest ought to be determined on track. Luck and destiny will have roles, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that every disputed moment will be pored over by the squad to ascertain whether they need to intervene and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will intensify and each time it happens it is in danger of potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Already, after the team made for position swaps at Monza due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear about bias also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to see a title endlessly debated over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. Questioned whether he felt the team had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but noted it's a developing process.

“We've had several challenging moments and we discussed various aspects,” he said post-race. “However finally it's educational for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal wriggle room left for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser now to simply stop analyzing and step back from the fray.