🔗 Share this article

McLaren and Formula One could do with anything decisive in the title fight involving Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without reference to the pit wall with the championship finale kicks off this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to team tensions

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a fresh start. The British driver was almost certainly fully conscious of the historical context of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate at the last race weekend. During an intense championship duel with the Australian, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes was lost on no one but the incident which triggered his statement differed completely from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“Should you criticize me for just going on the inside through an opening then you don't belong in F1,” stated Norris of his opening-lap attempt to overtake which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

The remark seemed to echo Senna’s “If you no longer go for a gap that exists then you cease to be a racing driver” justification he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, securing him the championship.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

While the spirit remains comparable, the phrasing is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him through the first corner while Norris did try to execute a clean overtake at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he had with his team colleague as he went through. This incident stemmed from him clipping the Red Bull of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; the implication being their collision was verboten under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris ought to be told to return the position he gained. The team refused, but it was indicative that in any cases between them, both will promptly appeal the squad to intervene in their favor.

Squad management and fairness under scrutiny

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race one another and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules about what defines just or unjust – under these conditions, now covers misfortune, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Most crucially to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists on fairness and at what point their perspectives might split with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when their friendly rapport between the two could eventually – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes boss Wolff post-race. “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 the audience, during this dual battle, getting interesting will probably be welcomed as an on-track confrontation rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the other impression from all this is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making appropriate choices for their interests with successful results. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and principled leader 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 is unedifying. Their competition should be decided on track. Chance and fate will play their part, but better to let them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be pored over by the squad to determine if they need to intervene and then cleared up later in private.

The scrutiny will increase and each time it happens it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made their drivers swap places in Italy because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also looms.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to witness a championship constantly disputed because it may be considered that fairness attempts were unequal. Questioned whether he believed the squad had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“We've had several challenging moments and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he said post-race. “However finally it's educational 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 close the books and withdraw from the conflict.