🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with Formula One could do with anything decisive in the title fight between Norris and Piastri being decided through on-track action and without reference to the pit wall as the title run-in kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath prompts team tensions

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense debriefs dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a reset. Norris was almost certainly more than aware of the historical context of his riposte toward his upset colleague at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel with the Australian, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence that provoked his comment differed completely from incidents characterizing Senna's great rivalries.

“If you fault me for simply attempting an inside move of a big gap then you should not be in Formula One,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to overtake which resulted in the cars colliding.

The remark appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “If you no longer go an available gap that exists then you cease to be a racing driver” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

Although the attitude is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he never intended to allow Prost beat him through the first corner whereas Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his McLaren teammate during the pass. This incident stemmed from him touching the car driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that their collision was forbidden 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 in any cases between them, each would quickly ask to the team to step in in their favor.

Squad management and impartiality under scrutiny

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to let their drivers race against each other and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents about what defines just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now includes misfortune, tactical calls and on-track occurrences like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Of most import to the title race, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and at what point their perspectives might split with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when their friendly rapport between the two could eventually – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It will reach a point where minor points count,” said Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I suppose aggression will increase a bit more. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will probably be welcomed in the form of a track duel rather than a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Not least because in Formula One the other impression from all this is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren are making the correct decisions for their interests and it has paid off. They clinched their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (though a great achievement diminished by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they possess a moral and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Racing purity against squad control

Yet having drivers competing for the title appealing to the team to decide matters appears unsightly. Their competition should be decided through racing. Chance and fate will play their part, but better to let them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be pored over by the squad to determine if intervention is needed and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will increase and each time it happens it is in danger of potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made for position swaps at Monza due to Norris experiencing a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the shadow of concern of favouritism also emerges.

Team perspective and future challenges

No one wants to witness a championship constantly disputed over perceived that fairness attempts had not been balanced. When asked if he felt the team had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but noted it's a developing process.

“We've had several challenging moments and we discussed various aspects,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal wriggle room left to do their cramming, so it may be better now to simply stop analyzing and step back from the fray.