🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with Formula One could do with anything decisive in the championship battle involving Norris and Piastri being decided on the track rather than without reference to team orders as the championship finale kicks off this weekend at COTA starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts team tensions

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful debriefs dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was likely more than aware of the historical context of his riposte toward his upset colleague during the previous race weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight with the Australian, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments was lost on no one but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined Senna's great rivalries.

“If you fault me for simply attempting on the inside of a big gap then you don't belong in Formula One,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to pass that led to their vehicles making contact.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “Should you stop attempting an available gap that exists then you cease to be 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

Although the attitude remains comparable, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him at turn one whereas Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his McLaren teammate during the pass. This incident was a result of him touching the car of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that their collision was forbidden under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that during disputes between them, both will promptly appeal the squad to step in in their favor.

Squad management and impartiality being examined

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete one another and strive to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents over what constitutes fair or unfair – under these conditions, now includes bad luck, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question of perception.

Most crucially to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists as fair and at what point their perspectives might split from the team's stance. Which is when the amicable relationship among them could eventually – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach to a situation where minor points count,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and back-calculate and I suppose aggression will increase a bit more. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will probably be welcomed as an on-track confrontation instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the other impression from all this isn't very inspiring.

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

Racing purity versus squad control

However, with racers in a championship fight looking to the pitwall for resolutions is unedifying. Their contest ought to be determined on track. Chance and fate will have roles, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be pored over by the squad to ascertain whether intervention is needed and then cleared up later in private.

The scrutiny will intensify and each time it happens it risks potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Previously, following the team's decision their drivers swap places in Italy due to Norris experiencing a slow pit stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the shadow of concern of favouritism also emerges.

Team perspective and future challenges

Nobody desires to witness a championship endlessly debated over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. When asked if he believed the squad had acted correctly by both drivers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several difficult situations and we discussed various aspects,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately it's educational with the whole team.”

Six races stay. McLaren have little room for error for last-minute adjustments, so it may be better now to simply close the books and withdraw from the fray.