🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with F1 could do with any conclusive outcome in the title fight involving Norris and Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without reference to the pit wall as the championship finale kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath prompts internal strain

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and stressful debriefs dealt with, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly fully conscious of the historical context regarding his retort toward his upset colleague during the previous grand prix weekend. During an intense title fight against Piastri, his reference to a famous Senna most famous sentiments was lost on no one but the incident which triggered his statement differed completely to those that defined Senna's great rivalries.

“If you fault me for just going on the inside through an opening then you don't belong in F1,” stated Norris of his opening-lap attempt to overtake which resulted in the cars colliding.

The remark appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “Should you stop attempting an available gap which is there then you cease to be a true racer” justification he provided to the racing knight after he ploughed into the French champion in Japan back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

Although the attitude is similar, the wording marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he had no intent of letting Prost beat him at turn one while Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he had with his McLaren teammate during the pass. That itself stemmed from him touching the Red Bull of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that their collision was verboten under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris should be instructed to give back the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, but it was indicative that in any cases of contention, both will promptly appeal the squad to intervene in their favor.

Squad management and impartiality under scrutiny

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete one another and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents over what constitutes just or unjust – under these conditions, now includes misfortune, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there remains the issue of perception.

Most crucially to the title race, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists as fair and when their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. Which is when the amicable relationship among them could eventually – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come to a situation where minor points count,” commented Mercedes boss Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I guess aggression will increase a bit more. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as a track duel rather than a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Especially since in Formula One the alternative perception from all this isn't very inspiring.

To be fair, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for themselves and it has paid off. They secured their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity versus team management

However, with racers competing for the title looking to the pitwall for resolutions appears unsightly. Their contest should be decided through racing. Chance and fate will play their part, but better to let them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the team to determine if intervention is needed and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of potentially making a difference that could be critical. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps at Monza because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear about bias also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

No one wants to see a title constantly disputed over perceived that fairness attempts were unequal. Questioned whether he believed the squad had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri responded that they did, but noted it's a developing process.

“There’s been some difficult situations and we discussed a number of things,” 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 now to simply stop analyzing and step back from the conflict.