🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with F1 could do with anything decisive in the championship battle involving Lando Norris & Piastri getting resolved on the track and without resorting to the pit wall as the championship finale begins at the Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts team tensions

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses concluded, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. Norris was almost certainly fully conscious about the historical parallels regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel with the Australian, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined Senna's iconic battles.

“If you fault me for just going on the inside of a big gap then you don't belong in F1,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to overtake that led to their vehicles making contact.

His comment seemed to echo Senna’s “Should you stop attempting an available gap which is there then you cease to be a racing driver” justification he gave to the racing knight following his collision with Alain Prost at Suzuka back in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

While the spirit is similar, the phrasing is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended to allow Prost beat him at turn one while Norris did try to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he had with his McLaren teammate as he went through. This incident was a result of him touching the Red Bull driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; the implication being the two teammates clashing was verboten under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that in any cases of contention, both will promptly appeal to the team to step in in their favor.

Team dynamics and impartiality under scrutiny

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete one another and strive to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules over what constitutes fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, strategy and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Most crucially to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists as fair and when their perspectives might split with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when their friendly rapport among them could eventually – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come a point where minor points count,” commented Mercedes boss Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and back-calculate and I suppose the elbows are going to come out further. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as a track duel rather than a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Especially since for F1 the other impression from all this is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren are making appropriate choices for themselves with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (though a great achievement overshadowed by the fuss prompted by their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they possess a moral and principled leader who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity against team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title appealing to the team to decide matters is unedifying. Their competition ought to be determined through racing. Luck and destiny will have roles, 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 squad to determine if intervention is needed and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will increase and each time it happens it risks possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Already, 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 at Hungary, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also emerges.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to see a title constantly disputed because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. Questioned whether he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded that they did, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“There’s been some difficult situations and we discussed a number of things,” he said post-race. “However finally it's educational for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. McLaren have little wriggle room left to do their cramming, so it may be better now to simply stop analyzing and step back from the fray.