🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One could do with any conclusive outcome in the championship battle involving Norris & Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without reference to the pit wall with the championship finale begins this weekend at Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath prompts internal strain

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and stressful post-race analyses concluded, McLaren will be hoping for a fresh start. The British driver was likely fully conscious of the historical context regarding his retort toward his upset colleague at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight with the Australian, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes was lost on no one yet the occurrence that provoked his comment differed completely to those that defined the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

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

The remark seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap that exists then you cease to be a true racer” justification he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

Although the attitude remains comparable, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he never intended to allow Prost to defeat him at turn one whereas Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised even with the glancing blow he made against his team colleague as he went through. This incident stemmed from him clipping the car driven by Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place was “unfair”; suggesting that their collision was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to step in in their favor.

Squad management and fairness being examined

This comes naturally from McLaren's commendable approach to let their drivers race one another and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules over what constitutes fair or unfair – under these conditions, now includes misfortune, tactical calls and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Of most import to the title race, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and when their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when their friendly rapport among them may – finally – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come a point where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes team principal Wolff after Singapore. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I guess aggression will increase further. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For spectators, during this dual battle, increased excitement will likely be appreciated as an on-track confrontation instead of a data-driven decision of circumstances. Especially since in Formula One the other impression from all this is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for themselves with successful results. They secured their tenth team championship in Singapore (though a great achievement diminished by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as squad leader they possess a moral and upright commander who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity against squad control

Yet having drivers in a championship fight appealing to the team to decide matters is unedifying. Their competition should be decided on track. Chance and fate will play their part, but better to let them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the squad to determine if they need to intervene and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will intensify with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Previously, after the team made for position swaps in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the shadow of concern about bias also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

Nobody desires to witness a championship endlessly debated because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. When asked if he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“There’s been some difficult situations and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he said after Singapore. “However finally it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal room for error to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser now to simply close the books and step back from the conflict.