🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with F1 could do with anything decisive in the championship battle involving Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved on the track rather than without resorting to the pit wall as the title run-in kicks off at the Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath prompts internal strain

After the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and tense post-race analyses dealt with, McLaren is aiming for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly more than aware about the historical parallels of his riposte toward his upset colleague at the last grand prix weekend. During an intense 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 differed completely to those that defined the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“Should you criticize me for just going on the inside through an opening then you should not be in F1,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to overtake which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

The remark appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “Should you stop attempting an available gap that exists then you cease to be a true racer” justification he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into the French champion at Suzuka in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

While the spirit is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent to allow Prost beat him through the first corner while Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty despite the minor contact he made against his McLaren teammate as he went through. This incident stemmed from him touching 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 verboten by team protocols for racing and Norris ought to be told to return the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that in any cases of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to step in on his behalf.

Team dynamics and impartiality being examined

This comes naturally from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete against each other and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents over what constitutes fair or unfair – under these conditions, now includes bad luck, strategy and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there is the question of perception.

Of most import for the championship, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists as fair and at what point their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. That is when the amicable relationship among them may – finally – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It will reach to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Wolff after Singapore. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I guess the elbows are going to come out further. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will probably be welcomed as a track duel instead of a data-driven decision of circumstances. Especially since for F1 the alternative perception from all this is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for themselves with successful results. They clinched their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and with Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Racing purity versus team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall for resolutions appears unsightly. Their contest ought to be determined through racing. Chance and fate will have roles, 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 afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will intensify with every occurrence it risks possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made for position swaps in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris won, the shadow of concern about bias also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

No one wants to witness a championship constantly disputed over perceived that fairness attempts were unequal. When asked if he felt the team had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“We've had several difficult situations and we discussed various aspects,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal room for error to do their cramming, so it may be better now to simply stop analyzing and withdraw from the fray.