🔗 Share this article

McLaren along with F1 could do with any conclusive outcome in the title fight between Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action and without reference to the pit wall with the title run-in kicks off at the COTA on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout leads to team tensions

With the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful post-race analyses concluded, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a fresh start. The British driver was almost certainly more than aware about the historical parallels of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate during the previous race weekend. During an intense championship duel with the Australian, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes did not go unnoticed but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing Senna's iconic battles.

“Should you criticize me for just going an inside move of a big gap then you should not be in Formula One,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to pass that led to their vehicles making contact.

The remark appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap which is there then you cease to be a racing driver” justification he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with the French champion at Suzuka back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

While the spirit is similar, the phrasing is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended to allow Prost beat him through the first corner while Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised even with the glancing blow he had with his McLaren teammate during the pass. That itself was a result of him touching the car driven by Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris gaining the place was “unfair”; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was forbidden under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris should be instructed to return the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that in any cases of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to intervene on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This is part and parcel 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 about what defines fair or unfair – under these conditions, now includes bad luck, tactical calls and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there is the question regarding opinions.

Most crucially 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 from the team's stance. That is when their friendly rapport among them may – finally – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach to a situation where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes team principal Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess aggression will increase a bit more. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated in the form of a track duel rather than a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Especially since for F1 the other impression from these events is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for themselves and it has paid off. They secured their tenth team championship in Singapore (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus squad control

Yet having drivers competing for the title appealing to the team to decide matters appears unsightly. Their competition ought to be determined on track. Luck and destiny will have roles, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it and see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be pored over by the squad to determine if intervention is needed and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will intensify with every occurrence it risks possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps in Italy due to Norris experiencing a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear about bias also emerges.

Team perspective and future challenges

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated because it may be considered that fairness attempts had not been balanced. When asked if he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“There’s been some difficult situations and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately it's educational for the entire squad.”

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