🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One would benefit from anything decisive in the championship battle between Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided on the track rather than without reference to the pit wall as the title run-in kicks off this weekend at COTA starting Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout prompts team tensions

After the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and tense post-race analyses dealt with, McLaren is aiming for a fresh start. Norris was likely fully conscious of the historical context of his riposte toward his upset colleague at the last grand prix weekend. During an intense title fight against Piastri, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes did not go unnoticed but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined Senna's great rivalries.

“Should you criticize me for just going an inside move through an opening then you should not be in Formula One,” Norris said of his opening-lap attempt to overtake which resulted in the cars colliding.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” justification he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with the French champion 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 had no intent of letting Prost beat him through the first corner while Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his McLaren teammate as he went through. This incident was a result of him clipping the Red Bull of Max Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, instantly stated that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was forbidden under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris should be instructed to give back the place he had made. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to intervene in their favor.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race one another and to try to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents over what constitutes just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now covers bad luck, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there remains the issue of perception.

Most crucially to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists on fairness and at what point their perspectives might split from the team's stance. Which is when the amicable relationship among them could eventually – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Wolff after Singapore. “Then they’ll start to calculate and back-calculate and I suppose aggression will increase further. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For the audience, during this dual battle, getting interesting will likely be appreciated in the form of a track duel instead of a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Not least because for F1 the other impression from all this isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for their interests with successful results. They secured their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to act correctly.

Racing purity versus team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title appealing to the team to decide matters is unedifying. Their contest ought to be determined on track. Luck and destiny will have roles, but better to let them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be pored over by the squad to ascertain whether they need to intervene and then cleared up later in private.

The scrutiny will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Already, following the team's decision for position swaps in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear about bias also looms.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to witness a championship endlessly debated over perceived that fairness attempts were unequal. When asked if he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several difficult situations and we discussed a number of things,” he said post-race. “However finally it's educational with the whole team.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal wriggle room left to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser to just close the books and step back from the fray.