🔗 Share this article

McLaren and Formula One could do with any conclusive outcome in the title fight between Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided on the track and without resorting to team orders with the championship finale kicks off at the Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath leads to team tensions

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and stressful post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly more than aware of the historical context regarding his retort toward his upset colleague during the previous grand prix weekend. During an intense title fight with the Australian, his reference to a famous Senna well-known quotes did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined Senna's iconic battles.

“Should you criticize me for just going on the inside of a big gap then you don't belong in F1,” stated Norris of his opening-lap attempt to overtake that led to their vehicles making contact.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “Should you stop attempting for a gap that exists you are no longer a true racer” defence he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into the French champion at Suzuka back in 1990, securing him the championship.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

While the spirit is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent of letting Prost to defeat him at turn one while Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his team colleague during the pass. That itself stemmed from him touching the car of Max Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place was “unfair”; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was verboten by team protocols of engagement and Norris should be instructed to return the place he had made. The team refused, but it was indicative that in any cases between them, both will promptly appeal the squad to intervene on his behalf.

Squad management and fairness being examined

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete one another and to try to maintain strict fairness. Aside from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers misfortune, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there remains the issue of perception.

Most crucially to the title race, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists as fair and at what point their perspectives might split from the team's stance. That is when their friendly rapport among them 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 they’ll start to calculate and back-calculate and I guess aggression will increase further. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as an on-track confrontation instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Not least because for F1 the other impression from these events is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren are making the correct decisions for their interests and it has paid off. They secured their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and principled leader who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Racing purity versus squad control

However, with racers competing for the title appealing to the team to decide matters appears unsightly. Their competition should be decided through racing. Chance and fate will play their part, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it and see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the squad to ascertain whether intervention is needed and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will intensify and each time it happens it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear about bias also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

No one wants to witness a championship constantly disputed over perceived that fairness attempts had not been balanced. Questioned whether he felt the team had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“There’s been some difficult situations and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he said after Singapore. “However finally it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. 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.