🔗 Share this article

McLaren and Formula One could do with any conclusive outcome during this championship battle involving Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided on the track and without reference to team orders with the championship finale kicks off at the Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath prompts team tensions

After the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and tense post-race analyses concluded, McLaren 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 against Piastri, that Norris invoked a famous Senna most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence which triggered his statement differed completely from incidents characterizing Senna's great rivalries.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting on the inside through an opening then you should not be in F1,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to pass that led to the cars colliding.

His comment appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap which is there then you cease to be a true racer” justification he gave to the racing knight after he ploughed into the French champion in Japan back in 1990, securing him the title.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

While the spirit is similar, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he had no intent to allow Prost beat him through the first corner whereas Norris did try to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty despite the minor contact he made against his team colleague as he went through. This incident was a result of him clipping the Red Bull driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, immediately declared that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that their collision was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris should be instructed to give back the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that in any cases between them, each would quickly ask the squad to step in in their favor.

Squad management and fairness under scrutiny

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 in setting precedents over what constitutes just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now covers misfortune, tactical calls and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Most crucially for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and at what point their perspectives might split from the team's stance. Which is when the amicable relationship among them could eventually – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It will reach a point where minor points count,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff after Singapore. “Then they’ll start to calculate and back-calculate and I suppose the elbows are going to come out further. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

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

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

Racing purity against squad control

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall for resolutions is unedifying. Their contest ought to be determined through racing. Chance and fate will have roles, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the squad to determine if they need to intervene and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will increase and each time it happens it risks potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Already, after the team made their drivers swap places in Italy due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the shadow of concern of favouritism also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

Nobody desires to see a title endlessly debated because it may be considered that fairness attempts had not been balanced. Questioned whether he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded that they did, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“There’s been some challenging moments and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal room for error for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser to just stop analyzing and withdraw from the conflict.