🔗 Share this article

McLaren and F1 could do with any conclusive outcome during this championship battle between Lando Norris and Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without resorting to team orders as the title run-in begins this weekend at Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout prompts internal strain

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses concluded, McLaren is aiming for a reset. The British driver was likely fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte toward his upset colleague at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel with the Australian, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s 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 Senna's iconic battles.

“If you fault me for just going an inside move of a big gap then you don't belong in F1,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to pass which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

The remark seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap which is there you are no longer a true racer” defence he provided to the racing knight after he ploughed into the French champion in Japan in 1990, securing him the title.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

Although the attitude remains comparable, the wording marks where parallels stop. The late champion confessed he never intended of letting Prost to defeat him through the first corner while Norris did try to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty despite the minor contact he made against his McLaren teammate during the pass. This incident stemmed from him clipping the Red Bull driven by Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was verboten by team protocols for racing and Norris ought to be told to return the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, but it was indicative that in any cases between them, each would quickly ask the squad to intervene on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This comes naturally from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete one another and strive to maintain strict fairness. Aside from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules about what defines just or unjust – under these conditions, now includes misfortune, strategy and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there remains the issue of perception.

Of most import for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists on fairness and when their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. Which is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come a point where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess aggression will increase further. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as a track duel instead of a data-driven decision of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the other impression from all this isn't very inspiring.

To be fair, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for their interests and it has paid off. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Racing purity versus squad control

Yet having drivers competing for the title appealing to the team for resolutions appears unsightly. Their contest should be decided on track. Chance and fate will have roles, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the squad to determine if 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 which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made for position swaps at Monza because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

Nobody desires to see a title constantly disputed over perceived that fairness attempts had not been balanced. When asked if he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but noted it's a developing process.

“We've had several difficult situations and we discussed various aspects,” he said after Singapore. “But ultimately 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.