🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with Formula One would benefit from anything decisive in the championship battle between Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without resorting to team orders with the title run-in begins at the Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to team tensions

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful post-race analyses dealt with, McLaren is aiming for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte toward his upset colleague during the previous grand prix weekend. During an intense championship duel against Piastri, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments was lost on no one yet the occurrence that provoked his comment differed completely from incidents characterizing Senna's great rivalries.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting on the inside of a big gap then you should not be in F1,” Norris said of his opening-lap attempt to overtake that led to the cars colliding.

The remark seemed to echo Senna’s “Should you stop attempting for a gap which is there then you cease to be a true racer” justification he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with Alain Prost in Japan back in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

Although the attitude is similar, the wording marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him through the first corner whereas Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he had with his team colleague during the pass. That itself stemmed from him touching the car driven by 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 of engagement and Norris should be instructed to give back the position he gained. The team refused, but it was indicative that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to step in on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness under scrutiny

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete one another and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules about what defines just or unjust – under these conditions, now includes misfortune, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Most crucially to the title race, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and at what point their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when the amicable relationship among them may – finally – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I suppose aggression will increase further. That's when it begins to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will probably be welcomed in the form of an on-track confrontation instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Especially since for F1 the other impression from these events isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for themselves and it has paid off. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and with Stella as team principal they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Racing purity against squad control

Yet having drivers competing for the title appealing to the team for resolutions is unedifying. Their contest ought to be determined through racing. Luck and destiny will play their part, but better to let them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be pored over by the squad to ascertain whether they need to intervene and subsequently resolved later in private.

The examination will increase and each time it happens it is in danger of potentially making a difference that could be critical. Already, following the team's decision for position swaps in Italy due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

No one wants to witness a championship endlessly debated over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. When asked if he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but noted it's a developing process.

“We've had several difficult situations and we discussed various aspects,” he said post-race. “However finally it's educational for the entire squad.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal wriggle room left for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser to just stop analyzing and step back from the fray.