🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and F1 would benefit from anything decisive in the title fight between Lando Norris & Piastri being decided through on-track action and without reference to the pit wall with the title run-in begins at the Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout prompts team tensions

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and tense debriefs dealt with, McLaren will be hoping for a reset. Norris was likely fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate during the previous grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel against Piastri, that Norris invoked a famous Senna most famous sentiments was lost on no one but the incident that provoked his comment differed completely to those that defined Senna's great rivalries.

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

His comment appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap which is there then you cease to be a racing driver” defence he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with Alain Prost at Suzuka back in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

Although the attitude is similar, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. The late champion confessed he never intended to allow Prost to defeat him at turn one whereas Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his McLaren teammate during the pass. That itself stemmed from him clipping the car of Max Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that their collision was verboten by team protocols for racing and Norris should be instructed to give back the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, but it was indicative that in any cases of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to intervene in their favor.

Team dynamics and fairness under scrutiny

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race against each other and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers misfortune, strategy and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there is the question of perception.

Most crucially for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and when their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. Which is when their friendly rapport between the two may – finally – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It will reach a point where minor points count,” commented Mercedes team principal Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I suppose aggression will increase a bit more. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For the audience, during this dual battle, getting interesting will likely be appreciated in the form of an on-track confrontation instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Especially since in Formula One the other impression from these events is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for themselves with successful results. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the fuss prompted by their drivers' clash) and with Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and principled leader who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity versus team management

Yet having drivers in a championship fight looking to the pitwall for resolutions appears unsightly. Their competition should be decided through racing. Luck and destiny will play their part, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the team to ascertain whether they need to intervene and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Already, after the team made their drivers swap places in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the shadow of concern of favouritism also looms.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

No one wants to see a title constantly disputed over perceived that fairness attempts were unequal. Questioned whether he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded that they did, but mentioned 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 a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. McLaren have little room for error for last-minute adjustments, so it may be better now to simply close the books and withdraw from the conflict.