🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with Formula One could do with any conclusive outcome in the championship battle between Norris and Piastri getting resolved through on-track action rather than without resorting to the pit wall with the championship finale begins this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts internal strain

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and tense debriefs dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly fully conscious of the historical context regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate during the previous race weekend. During an intense title fight against Piastri, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments was lost on no one yet the occurrence which triggered his statement differed completely from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“If you fault me for simply attempting an inside move through an opening then you should not be in F1,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to overtake that led to the cars colliding.

The remark seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap which is there then you cease to be a racing driver” justification he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost at Suzuka in 1990, securing him the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

While the spirit is similar, the wording marks where parallels stop. The late champion confessed he never intended of letting Prost beat him at turn one whereas Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he had with his team colleague during the pass. That itself was a result of him clipping the car of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; the implication being the two teammates clashing was verboten by team protocols of engagement and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that during disputes between them, each would quickly ask the squad to intervene on his behalf.

Squad management and fairness under scrutiny

This comes naturally from McLaren's commendable approach to let their drivers race against each other and to try to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now covers misfortune, strategy and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there is the question of perception.

Most crucially to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and at what point their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. Which is when their friendly rapport between the two may – finally – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes boss Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I suppose the elbows are going to come out further. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will likely be appreciated as an on-track confrontation rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Especially since for F1 the other impression from all this isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for their interests and it has paid off. They clinched their tenth team championship in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and with Stella as squad leader they possess a moral and upright commander who truly aims to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity against squad control

However, with racers competing for the title looking to the pitwall to decide matters appears unsightly. Their competition ought to be determined on track. Luck and destiny will play their part, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the team to determine if they need to intervene and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will increase and each time it happens it risks possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Already, following the team's decision for position swaps at Monza due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris won, the shadow of concern of favouritism also emerges.

Team perspective and future challenges

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated because it may be considered that fairness attempts had not been balanced. Questioned whether he felt the team had managed to do right by both drivers, Piastri responded that they did, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“There’s been some challenging moments and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he stated after Singapore. “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 close the books and withdraw from the conflict.