🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and F1 could do with anything decisive in the championship battle between Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action and without reference to team orders with the championship finale begins this weekend at Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath leads to internal strain

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses concluded, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly fully conscious of the historical context of his riposte toward his upset colleague during the previous race weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight against Piastri, his reference to a famous Senna most famous sentiments was lost on no one but the incident that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting an inside move of a big gap then you don't belong in F1,” Norris said of his opening-lap attempt to overtake that led to the cars colliding.

His comment appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” defence he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with the French champion in Japan back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

While the spirit remains comparable, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he had no intent to allow Prost beat him at turn one while Norris did try to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he made against his team colleague as he went through. That itself was a result of him touching the car driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; suggesting that their collision was verboten by team protocols of engagement and Norris should be instructed to give back the place he had made. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that in any cases of contention, both will promptly appeal the squad to intervene on his behalf.

Squad management and fairness being examined

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race one another and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, strategy and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there remains the issue of perception.

Of most import to the title race, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists on fairness and when their perspectives might split with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It will reach to a situation where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes team principal Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I guess aggression will increase further. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as a track duel rather than a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Especially since in Formula One the other impression from these events is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren are making appropriate choices for their interests and it has paid off. They secured their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and with Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Sporting integrity against squad control

However, with racers competing for the title looking to the pitwall to decide matters is unedifying. Their competition ought to be determined through racing. Luck and destiny will have roles, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the team to determine if they need to intervene and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

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 in Italy because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris won, the shadow of concern of favouritism also emerges.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

No one wants to witness a championship endlessly debated over perceived that the efforts to be fair were unequal. When asked if he felt the team had acted correctly by both drivers, Piastri responded that they did, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several challenging moments and we discussed various aspects,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal wriggle room left for last-minute adjustments, so it may be better to just stop analyzing and withdraw from the fray.