🔗 Share this article

McLaren and F1 could do with anything decisive during this title fight involving Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved on the track rather than without resorting to the pit wall with the championship finale begins at the COTA on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to internal strain

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful debriefs dealt with, McLaren will be hoping for a reset. Norris was almost certainly more than aware of the historical context regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate during the previous race weekend. During an intense title fight with the Australian, his reference to a famous Senna most famous sentiments was lost on no one yet the occurrence that provoked his comment differed completely from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“If you fault me for just going on the inside of a big gap then you should not be in F1,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to pass that led to 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 provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with the French champion at Suzuka in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

Although the attitude is similar, the wording marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him at turn one while Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty despite the minor contact he had with his team colleague during the pass. This incident stemmed from him clipping the Red Bull driven by Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris gaining the place was “unfair”; the implication being their collision was forbidden 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, both will promptly appeal to the team to step in in their favor.

Team dynamics and fairness under scrutiny

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete against each other and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, strategy and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue of perception.

Of most import to the title race, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and when their perspectives might split with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when their friendly rapport among them may – finally – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach to a situation where minor points count,” commented Mercedes boss Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess aggression will increase further. That's when it begins to become thrilling.”

Audience expectations and championship implications

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will probably be welcomed in the form of a track duel rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Not least because for F1 the alternative perception from all this isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for themselves and it has paid off. They clinched their tenth team championship in Singapore (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus team management

However, with racers competing for the title appealing to the team 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 see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be pored over by the squad to determine if intervention is needed and then cleared up later in private.

The examination will intensify with every occurrence it risks possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps at Monza due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the shadow of concern of favouritism also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

Nobody desires to see a title constantly disputed over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. When asked if he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but noted it's a developing process.

“We've had several challenging moments and we discussed a number of things,” he said post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal wriggle room left to do their cramming, so it may be better now to simply stop analyzing and step back from the conflict.