🔗 Share this article

McLaren and Formula One could do with anything decisive in the championship battle involving Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved through on-track action and without resorting to team orders as the title run-in begins this weekend at Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath leads to internal strain

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly more than aware of the historical context of his riposte toward his upset colleague at the last grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel against Piastri, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s 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.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting on the inside through an opening then you don't belong in F1,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to overtake that led to their vehicles making contact.

His comment seemed to echo Senna’s “If you no longer go an available gap which is there you are no longer a racing driver” defence he provided to the racing knight after he ploughed into the French champion in Japan back in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

Although the attitude is similar, the phrasing is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended to allow Prost to defeat him through the first corner while Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he had with his McLaren teammate as he went through. This incident stemmed from him clipping the car of Max Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, immediately declared that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; 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 between them, each would quickly ask the squad to step in on his behalf.

Squad management and impartiality being examined

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete one another and to try to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now covers bad luck, strategy and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question of perception.

Most crucially to the title race, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists as fair and at what point their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when the amicable relationship between the two could eventually – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come a point where minor points count,” said Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I suppose aggression will increase further. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and championship implications

For spectators, during this dual battle, increased excitement will probably be welcomed in the form of an on-track confrontation rather than a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Not least because for F1 the other impression from these events isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for their interests with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity versus team management

Yet having drivers in a championship fight appealing to the team for resolutions appears unsightly. Their contest should be decided on track. Luck and destiny will play their part, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it and see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be pored over by the squad to ascertain whether intervention is needed and then cleared up later in private.

The scrutiny will intensify with every occurrence it risks potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made for position swaps in Italy due to Norris experiencing a slow pit stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the shadow of concern 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 felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded that they did, but noted it's a developing process.

“There’s been some difficult situations and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal room for error to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser now to simply close the books and step back from the conflict.