🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with F1 would benefit from any conclusive outcome in the championship battle involving Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved on the track and without resorting to the pit wall as the title run-in begins at the Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts internal strain

After the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses concluded, McLaren is aiming for a reset. Norris was likely more than aware about the historical parallels of his riposte toward his upset colleague during the previous race weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight against Piastri, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments 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 don't belong in F1,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to overtake that led to the cars colliding.

His comment seemed to echo Senna’s “If you no longer go for a gap that exists then you cease to be a racing driver” justification he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with Alain Prost at Suzuka in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

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 whereas Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty despite the minor contact he had with his team colleague as he went through. This incident was a result of him clipping the car of Max Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, instantly stated that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; the implication being their collision was verboten by team protocols for racing and Norris should be instructed to give back the place he had made. The team refused, but it was indicative that in any cases between them, both will promptly appeal the squad to step in on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This comes naturally from McLaren's commendable approach to let their drivers race against each other and strive to maintain strict fairness. Aside from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – under these conditions, now includes bad luck, 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 on fairness and at what point their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when the amicable relationship among them may – finally – become a little bit more 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 back-calculate and I guess the elbows are going to come out a bit more. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and championship implications

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will probably be welcomed in the form of an on-track confrontation rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Not least because in Formula One the alternative perception from all this is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making appropriate choices for their interests with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they have an ethical and principled leader who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Racing purity against team management

Yet having drivers in a championship fight looking to the pitwall to decide matters is unedifying. Their competition ought to be determined through racing. Luck and destiny will play their part, but better to let them simply go at it and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be pored over by the squad to determine if they need to intervene and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Already, following the team's decision their drivers swap places in Italy due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also emerges.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to witness a championship endlessly debated because it may be considered that fairness attempts had not been balanced. Questioned whether he felt the team had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“There’s been some challenging moments and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he said post-race. “However finally it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal room for error for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser to just stop analyzing and step back from the conflict.