🔗 Share this article

McLaren and F1 could do with any conclusive outcome in the title fight between Norris and Piastri getting resolved on the track rather than without reference to team orders as the championship finale begins at the Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath prompts team tensions

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and tense debriefs concluded, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a fresh start. The British driver was likely more than aware of the historical context of his riposte toward his upset colleague during the previous race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel with the Australian, that Norris invoked 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 Senna's iconic battles.

“Should you criticize me for just going on the inside of a big gap then you should not be in F1,” stated Norris of his opening-lap attempt to overtake that led to their vehicles making contact.

The remark appeared to paraphrase 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 after he ploughed into the French champion at Suzuka back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

While the spirit remains comparable, the wording marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he had no intent of letting Prost beat him through the first corner whereas Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty despite the minor contact he made against his team colleague as he went through. This incident was a result of him clipping the Red Bull driven by Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; the implication being the two teammates clashing was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to intervene on his behalf.

Team dynamics and impartiality under scrutiny

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race one another and strive to maintain strict fairness. Aside from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents over what constitutes fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers bad luck, tactical calls and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there is the question regarding opinions.

Most crucially for the championship, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and at what point their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. That is when the amicable relationship between the two could eventually – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It will reach to a situation where minor points count,” said Mercedes team principal Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I suppose the elbows are going to come out further. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and championship implications

For spectators, during this dual battle, increased excitement will likely be appreciated as an on-track confrontation instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the alternative perception from these events isn't very inspiring.

To be fair, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for themselves and it has paid off. They secured their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall to decide matters appears unsightly. Their competition should be decided on track. Luck and destiny will have roles, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the squad to ascertain whether intervention is needed and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear about bias also emerges.

Team perspective and future challenges

No one wants to witness a championship endlessly debated because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair were unequal. When asked if he felt the team had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several challenging moments and we discussed various aspects,” he said after Singapore. “But ultimately it's educational for the entire squad.”

Six races stay. McLaren have little wriggle room left to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser to just stop analyzing and withdraw from the conflict.