🔗 Share this article

McLaren and F1 would benefit from anything decisive in the title fight involving Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved through on-track action rather than without reference to the pit wall with the title run-in kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout leads to team tensions

After the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and tense debriefs concluded, McLaren will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly fully conscious of the historical context regarding his retort toward his upset colleague at the last grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight against Piastri, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes was lost on no one yet the occurrence which triggered his statement differed completely to those that defined the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“If you fault me for just going an inside move through an opening then you should not be in F1,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to overtake which resulted in the cars colliding.

His comment appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “If you no longer go an available gap which is there you are no longer a true racer” justification he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost in Japan back in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

Although the attitude remains comparable, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he had no intent of letting Prost to defeat him through the first corner 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 McLaren teammate during the pass. That itself stemmed from him touching the car of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place was “unfair”; the implication being the two teammates clashing was verboten by team protocols for racing and Norris should be instructed to return the position he gained. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that in any cases between them, each would quickly ask the squad to intervene on his behalf.

Squad management and fairness being examined

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. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents about what defines just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now covers misfortune, tactical calls and on-track occurrences like in Marina Bay – there is the question of perception.

Of most import for the championship, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists as fair and when their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. That is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It will reach a point where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I guess aggression will increase a bit more. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and championship implications

For the audience, during this dual battle, getting interesting will probably be welcomed as an on-track confrontation rather than a data-driven decision of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the other impression from all this is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for their interests with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as team principal they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Sporting integrity against squad control

However, with racers competing for the title appealing to the team to decide matters appears unsightly. Their competition ought to be determined through racing. Luck and destiny will have roles, but better to let them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that each contentious incident will be pored over by the squad to determine if intervention is needed and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will increase with every occurrence it risks possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made their drivers swap places in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear about bias also looms.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

No one wants to see a title constantly disputed over perceived that fairness attempts had not been balanced. When asked if he believed the squad had acted correctly by both drivers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“There’s been some challenging moments and we discussed various aspects,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six races stay. McLaren have little wriggle room left for last-minute adjustments, so it may be better to just close the books and withdraw from the conflict.