🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with Formula One could do with anything decisive in the title fight involving Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved through on-track action and without resorting to the pit wall as the championship finale kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to internal strain

After the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a reset. Norris was likely fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate during the previous grand prix weekend. During an intense championship duel with the Australian, his reference to a famous Senna most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed but the incident that provoked his comment differed completely from incidents characterizing Senna's iconic battles.

“If you fault me for simply attempting on the inside through an opening then you should not be in Formula One,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to pass that led to their vehicles making contact.

His comment appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap which is there then you cease to be a true racer” justification he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with Alain Prost at Suzuka in 1990, securing him the championship.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

Although the attitude is similar, the phrasing is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he never intended of letting Prost beat him at turn one while Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised 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 ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was forbidden under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to return the position he gained. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that in any cases between them, each would quickly ask to the team to intervene 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 to try to maintain strict fairness. Aside from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, tactical calls and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there is the question regarding opinions.

Most crucially to the title race, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and when their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. That is when their friendly rapport between the two may – finally – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach a point where minor points count,” said Mercedes boss Toto Wolff after Singapore. “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 become thrilling.”

Viewer desires 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. Especially since for F1 the other impression from these events isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for their interests with successful results. They clinched their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (though a great achievement 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 act correctly.

Racing purity against squad control

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall for resolutions appears unsightly. Their contest ought to be determined on track. Luck and destiny will have roles, but better to let them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely 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 possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Already, following the team's decision for position swaps at Monza because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the shadow of concern of favouritism also emerges.

Team perspective and future challenges

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated over perceived that fairness attempts were unequal. When asked if he felt the team had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but noted it's a developing process.

“We've had several challenging moments and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he said post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal room for error for last-minute adjustments, so it may be better now to simply close the books and withdraw from the conflict.