🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with F1 could do with anything decisive during this title fight involving Norris & Piastri being decided on the track rather than without resorting to team orders as the title run-in begins this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout prompts internal strain

After the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and tense post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate during the previous grand prix weekend. During an intense championship duel with the Australian, his reference to a famous Senna well-known quotes did not go unnoticed but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“If you fault me for simply attempting on the inside of a big gap then you should not be in Formula One,” Norris said of his opening-lap attempt to pass that led to the cars colliding.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap which is there then you cease to be a true racer” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with the French champion at Suzuka back in 1990, securing him the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

While the spirit is similar, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him at turn one while Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he had with his team colleague during the pass. That itself stemmed from him clipping the Red Bull of Max Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place was “unfair”; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was forbidden by team protocols for racing and Norris should be instructed to give back the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, but it was indicative that in any cases between them, both will promptly appeal the squad to intervene on his behalf.

Squad management and impartiality being examined

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete one another and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents about what defines just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now covers bad luck, strategy and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question regarding opinions.

Of most import 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 opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when their friendly rapport between the two could eventually – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes boss Toto Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I suppose the elbows are going to come out a bit more. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will probably be welcomed in the form of a track duel instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Especially since in Formula One the alternative perception from all this is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for their interests and it has paid off. They clinched their tenth team championship in Singapore (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and upright commander who truly aims to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus squad control

However, with racers competing for the title appealing to the team for resolutions is unedifying. Their competition ought to be determined through racing. Luck and destiny will play their part, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the team to ascertain whether intervention is needed and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will intensify with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Previously, after the team made their drivers swap places at Monza due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear about bias also emerges.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to witness a championship constantly disputed over perceived that fairness attempts had not been balanced. Questioned whether he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several challenging moments and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he said post-race. “However finally it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. McLaren have little room for error to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser to just stop analyzing and withdraw from the fray.