🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with F1 would benefit from any conclusive outcome in the title fight involving Norris & Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without reference to team orders as the championship finale kicks off 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 debriefs concluded, McLaren will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was likely more than aware about the historical parallels regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate during the previous race weekend. During an intense championship duel with the Australian, that Norris invoked a famous Senna well-known quotes was lost on no one yet the occurrence that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature to those that defined Senna's iconic battles.

“If you fault me for simply attempting an inside move of a big gap then you should not be in F1,” Norris said of his opening-lap attempt to overtake which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “Should you stop attempting an available gap which is there you are no longer a racing driver” defence he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with the French champion at Suzuka back in 1990, securing him the title.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

Although the attitude remains comparable, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. The late champion confessed he never intended of letting Prost to defeat him at turn one while Norris attempted 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 during the pass. This incident was a result of him touching the car of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, instantly stated that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; the implication being the two teammates clashing was forbidden by team protocols of engagement and Norris should be instructed to give back the position he gained. The team refused, 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 is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race one another and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents over what constitutes just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, strategy and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question 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 when their perspectives might split from the team's stance. That is when their friendly rapport among them may – finally – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach a point where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff after Singapore. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I guess the elbows are going to come out 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 likely be appreciated 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 is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren are making appropriate choices for themselves and it has paid off. They secured their tenth team championship in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as team principal they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Sporting integrity against team management

However, with racers in a championship fight appealing to the team to decide matters appears unsightly. Their contest should be decided through racing. Luck and destiny will have roles, but better to let them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, than the impression that each contentious incident will be pored over by the squad to determine if they need to intervene and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Already, after the team made their drivers swap places at Monza 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 spectre of a fear about bias also looms.

Team perspective and future challenges

No one wants to witness a championship endlessly debated because it may be considered that fairness attempts were unequal. Questioned whether he believed the squad had acted correctly by both drivers, Piastri said he believed they had, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“We've had several difficult situations and we discussed various aspects,” he said after Singapore. “However finally it's educational 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 conflict.