🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with Formula One could do with any conclusive outcome in the championship battle between Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri getting resolved through on-track action rather than without resorting to the pit wall with the championship finale begins at the Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout prompts internal strain

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and stressful post-race analyses concluded, McLaren 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 grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel with the Australian, his reference to a famous Senna most famous sentiments was lost on no one yet the occurrence that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature to those that defined the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting an inside move through an opening then you don't belong in Formula One,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to pass that led to the cars colliding.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap which is there you are no longer a racing driver” defence he provided to the racing knight following his collision with Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, securing him the championship.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

Although the attitude is similar, the phrasing is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent of letting Prost to defeat him through the first corner while Norris did try to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty despite the minor contact he had with his McLaren teammate as he went through. This incident was a result of him touching the Red Bull driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; suggesting that their collision was forbidden under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. The team refused, but it was indicative that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to step in in their favor.

Squad management and fairness being examined

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to let their drivers race one another and to try to maintain strict fairness. Aside from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes misfortune, strategy and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question of perception.

Of most import for the championship, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists on fairness and when their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. That is when the amicable relationship among them may – finally – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come to a situation where minor points count,” commented Mercedes team principal Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess aggression will increase a bit more. That's when it begins to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will likely be appreciated in the form of an on-track confrontation instead of a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Not least because for F1 the alternative perception from all this is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for themselves with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they possess a moral and principled leader who truly aims to do the right thing.

Racing purity versus squad control

Yet having drivers in a championship fight appealing to the team to decide matters is unedifying. Their contest ought to be determined on track. Luck and destiny will play their part, but better to let them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the squad to ascertain whether they need to intervene and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will intensify and each time it happens it risks potentially making a difference that could be critical. Already, following the team's decision their drivers swap places at Monza because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear about bias also looms.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. When asked if he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but noted 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. McLaren have little room for error to do their cramming, so it may be better now to simply stop analyzing and step back from the fray.