🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One could do with any conclusive outcome in the title fight between Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without reference to the pit wall with the title run-in begins this weekend at Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout leads to internal strain

After the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and tense post-race analyses dealt with, McLaren is aiming for a reset. The British driver was likely more than aware about the historical parallels regarding his retort toward his upset colleague during the previous grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel 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 to those that defined Senna'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 of his opening-lap attempt to pass which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

The remark seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” defence he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost at Suzuka back in 1990, securing him the championship.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

Although the attitude remains comparable, the wording is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended of letting Prost to defeat him through the first corner whereas Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he made against his McLaren teammate as he went through. This incident stemmed from him touching the Red Bull driven by Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, immediately declared that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; suggesting that their collision was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that in any cases of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to step in in their favor.

Squad management and impartiality under scrutiny

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete against each other and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question regarding opinions.

Most crucially 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 with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It will reach to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and back-calculate and I guess aggression will increase a bit more. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For spectators, during this dual battle, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as a track duel rather than a data-driven decision of circumstances. Not least because in Formula One the alternative perception from these events isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making appropriate choices for themselves with successful results. They clinched their tenth team championship in Singapore (though a great achievement overshadowed by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to act correctly.

Racing purity versus squad control

Yet having drivers in a championship fight appealing to the team for resolutions is unedifying. Their contest ought to be determined on track. Luck and destiny will have roles, but better to let them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be pored over by the squad to ascertain whether intervention is needed 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. Already, after the team made their drivers swap places at Monza because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear about bias also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated because it may be considered that fairness attempts had not been balanced. When asked if he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded he believed they had, 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. “However finally it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal wriggle room left to do their cramming, so it may be better now to simply close the books and withdraw from the fray.