🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One could do with any conclusive outcome in the title fight between Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without reference to team orders with the title run-in kicks off at the COTA on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts team tensions

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense debriefs concluded, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. The British driver was likely more than aware of the historical context regarding his retort toward his upset colleague during the previous grand prix weekend. During an intense championship duel against Piastri, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes was lost on no one but the incident which triggered his statement differed completely from incidents characterizing Senna's iconic battles.

“If you fault me for just going an inside move of a big gap then you should not be in F1,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to overtake that led to the cars colliding.

The remark appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “If you no longer go for a gap that exists then you cease to be a true racer” defence he gave to the racing knight following his collision with the French champion in Japan 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 to defeat him through the first corner whereas Norris did try to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he made against his team colleague as he went through. This incident stemmed from him clipping the Red Bull driven by Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, instantly stated that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; the implication being the two teammates clashing was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to return the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that during disputes between them, both will promptly appeal to the team to intervene on his behalf.

Squad management and impartiality under scrutiny

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete one another and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents about what defines just or unjust – under these conditions, now includes misfortune, strategy and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Most crucially to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and when their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when the amicable relationship between the two could eventually – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes boss 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 get interesting.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For the audience, during this dual battle, getting interesting will probably be welcomed in the form of a track duel rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the alternative perception from all this isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, 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 with Stella as team principal they possess a moral and principled leader who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity versus team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall to decide matters is unedifying. Their contest should be decided through racing. Luck and destiny will play their part, but better to let them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the squad to determine if 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 potentially making a difference that could be critical. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the shadow of concern about bias also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

Nobody desires to see a title constantly disputed because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair were unequal. Questioned whether he felt the team had managed to do right by both drivers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several challenging moments and we discussed a number of things,” he said after Singapore. “But ultimately it's educational with the whole team.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal wriggle room left for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser to just close the books and step back from the conflict.