🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One 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 title run-in begins at the COTA on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout leads to internal strain

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and tense post-race analyses concluded, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a reset. Norris was almost certainly more than aware about the historical parallels regarding his retort toward his upset colleague at the last grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel against Piastri, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s 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 of a big gap then you don't belong in Formula One,” stated Norris of his opening-lap attempt to pass that led to their vehicles making contact.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap that exists then you cease to be a racing driver” justification he gave to the racing knight following his collision with Alain Prost in Japan back in 1990, securing him the championship.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

While the spirit is similar, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. The late champion confessed he had no intent of letting Prost to defeat him through the first corner while Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he had with his team colleague as he went through. This incident stemmed from him clipping the car driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was forbidden by team protocols for racing and Norris should be instructed to return the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that in any cases of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to step in in their favor.

Team dynamics and fairness under scrutiny

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race one another and strive to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents over what constitutes fair or unfair – under these conditions, now includes misfortune, strategy and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue of perception.

Of most import for the championship, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists as fair and at what point their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when the amicable relationship between the two could eventually – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come a point where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes boss Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess the elbows are going to come out further. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will probably be welcomed in the form of an on-track confrontation instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Especially since for F1 the alternative perception from these events isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for themselves with successful results. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they possess a moral and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus squad control

However, with racers competing for the title looking to the pitwall for resolutions appears unsightly. Their competition should be decided on track. Luck and destiny will have roles, 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 ascertain whether intervention is needed and subsequently resolved later in private.

The scrutiny will intensify with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Already, following the team's decision their drivers swap places at Monza due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also looms.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. Questioned whether he believed the squad had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“There’s been some challenging moments and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he said after Singapore. “However finally it's educational with the whole team.”

Six meetings remain. McLaren have little room for error to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser now to simply stop analyzing and step back from the conflict.