🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with Formula One would benefit from anything decisive during this championship battle involving Norris and Piastri being decided on the track and without resorting to the pit wall as the title run-in kicks off this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath leads to internal strain

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad 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 race weekend. During an intense championship duel against Piastri, his reference to a famous Senna most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence that provoked his comment differed completely to those that defined the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“Should you criticize me for just going on the inside of a big gap then you should not be in Formula One,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to pass which resulted in the cars colliding.

The remark appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “Should you stop attempting for a gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost in Japan back in 1990, securing him the championship.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

While the spirit remains comparable, the wording marks where parallels stop. The late champion confessed he never intended to allow Prost to defeat him at turn one while Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he made against his team colleague as he went through. That itself stemmed from him touching the car driven by Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, immediately declared that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was forbidden under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that in any cases of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to intervene in their favor.

Team dynamics and fairness under scrutiny

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete against each other and to try to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents about what defines just or unjust – under these conditions, now covers bad luck, strategy and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Of most import for the championship, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists on fairness and when their perspectives might split from the team's stance. That is when the amicable relationship between the two could eventually – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come to a situation where minor points count,” commented 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 become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement 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 are making appropriate choices for their interests with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to do the right thing.

Racing purity versus squad control

Yet having drivers in a championship fight looking to the pitwall to decide matters is unedifying. Their contest ought to be determined on track. Luck and destiny will play their part, but better to let them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be pored over by the squad to determine if they need to intervene and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will increase with every occurrence it risks possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Already, following the team's decision their drivers swap places at Monza because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the shadow of concern about bias also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to see a title endlessly debated because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair were unequal. Questioned whether he felt the team had acted correctly by both drivers, Piastri responded that they did, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“We've had several challenging moments and we discussed a number of things,” he stated after Singapore. “But ultimately it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

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