🔗 Share this article

McLaren and F1 could do with anything decisive during this title fight between Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved through on-track action rather than without resorting to the pit wall with the title run-in begins at the Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout leads to team tensions

With the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and tense debriefs dealt with, McLaren is aiming for a reset. Norris was almost certainly more than aware about the historical parallels regarding his retort toward his upset colleague during the previous grand prix weekend. During an intense title fight against Piastri, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“If you fault me for simply attempting an inside move of a big gap then you should not be in F1,” Norris said of his opening-lap attempt to pass which resulted in the cars colliding.

The remark seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” justification he provided to the racing knight after he ploughed into the French champion in Japan in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

While the spirit is similar, the phrasing is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him at turn one whereas Norris did try to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his team colleague during the pass. This incident stemmed from him clipping the Red Bull driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; the implication being the two teammates clashing was verboten under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, but it was indicative that during disputes between them, each would quickly ask the squad to step in in their favor.

Squad management and impartiality under scrutiny

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race one another and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules over what constitutes just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now covers bad luck, tactical calls and on-track occurrences like in Marina Bay – there is the question regarding opinions.

Of most import to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and at what point their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when the amicable relationship between the two could eventually – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It will reach to a situation where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes boss Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess the elbows are going to come out a bit more. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For spectators, during this dual battle, increased excitement will likely be appreciated in the form of an on-track confrontation rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the alternative perception from these events is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for themselves with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and with Stella as team principal they possess a moral and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus team management

Yet having drivers in a championship fight appealing to the team for resolutions is unedifying. Their contest should be decided through racing. Luck and destiny will have roles, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the squad to ascertain whether they need to intervene and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will intensify and each time it happens it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Already, following the team's decision their drivers swap places in Italy due to Norris experiencing a slow pit stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the shadow of concern of favouritism also emerges.

Team perspective and future challenges

Nobody desires to witness a championship constantly disputed over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. When asked if he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several challenging moments and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he stated post-race. “However finally it's educational for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. McLaren have little room for error to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser now to simply stop analyzing and step back from the conflict.