🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One could do with anything decisive in the title fight between Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri getting resolved through on-track action and without reference to team orders as the championship finale kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath leads to internal strain

After the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and tense debriefs dealt with, McLaren is aiming for a fresh start. Norris was likely fully conscious of the historical context of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate during the previous race weekend. During an intense championship duel against Piastri, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed but the incident that provoked his comment 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 F1,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to overtake which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

The remark seemed to echo Senna’s “If you no longer go an available gap that exists then you cease to be a racing driver” defence he gave to the racing knight after he ploughed into Alain Prost in Japan back in 1990, securing him the championship.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

While the spirit remains comparable, the phrasing is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended to allow Prost beat him through the first corner while Norris did try to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate 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 car of Max Verstappen ahead 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 under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris should be instructed to return the position he gained. The team refused, but it was indicative that in any cases between them, both will promptly appeal to the team to intervene in their favor.

Team dynamics and impartiality under scrutiny

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete against each other and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents over what constitutes just or unjust – under these conditions, now includes bad luck, strategy and on-track occurrences like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue of perception.

Of most import to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and at what point their perspectives might split from the team's stance. Which is when their friendly rapport between the two may – finally – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come to a situation where minor points count,” commented Mercedes team principal Wolff after Singapore. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I guess aggression will increase a bit more. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated in the form of a track duel rather than a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Not least because in Formula One the alternative perception from all this isn't very inspiring.

To be fair, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for their interests and it has paid off. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (though a great achievement diminished by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they possess a moral and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus squad control

Yet having drivers in a championship fight looking to the pitwall for resolutions is unedifying. Their competition ought to be determined on track. Chance and fate will have roles, but better to let them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that each contentious incident will be pored over by the team to determine if intervention is needed and then cleared up later in private.

The examination will intensify and each time it happens it risks possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Already, after the team made their drivers swap places at Monza because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear about bias also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

No one wants 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 responded he believed they had, but noted it's a developing process.

“There’s been some challenging moments and we discussed a number of things,” he stated 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 stop analyzing and withdraw from the conflict.