🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with F1 would benefit from any conclusive outcome in the championship battle between Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved through on-track action rather than without reference to the pit wall as the championship finale begins this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to team tensions

With the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and stressful debriefs concluded, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. Norris was almost certainly fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight against Piastri, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes was lost on no one but the incident that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing Senna's great rivalries.

“If you fault me for just going an inside move through an opening then you should not be in Formula One,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to overtake which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

His comment seemed to echo Senna’s “If you no longer go for a gap that exists then you cease to be a true racer” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost at Suzuka in 1990, securing him the championship.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

Although the attitude is similar, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. The late champion confessed he never intended of letting Prost beat him at turn one whereas Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty despite the minor contact he had with his McLaren teammate during the pass. This incident was a result of him touching the car driven by Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; suggesting that their collision was forbidden by team protocols for racing and Norris ought to be told to give back the position he gained. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to intervene on his behalf.

Team dynamics and impartiality under scrutiny

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete against each other and to try to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents over what constitutes fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question 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 on fairness and at what point their perspectives might split with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come to a situation where minor points count,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and back-calculate and I suppose the elbows are going to come out a bit more. That's when it begins to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as a track duel instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Especially since in Formula One the other impression 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 in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as squad leader they possess a moral and upright commander who truly aims to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity versus squad control

Yet having drivers in a championship fight appealing to the team to decide matters appears unsightly. Their competition should be decided on track. Chance and fate 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 pored over by the team to determine if intervention is needed and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made for position swaps at Monza because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the shadow of concern about bias also looms.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to witness a championship constantly disputed over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. Questioned whether he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“There’s been some challenging moments and we discussed various aspects,” he said post-race. “However finally it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

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