🔗 Share this article

McLaren and Formula One could do with anything decisive during this championship battle involving Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved through on-track action rather than without resorting to the pit wall with the championship finale begins this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath leads to team tensions

After the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and stressful post-race analyses dealt with, McLaren will be hoping for a reset. Norris was likely fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte toward his upset colleague during the previous grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight with the Australian, his reference to a famous Senna most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed but the incident that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature to those that defined 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 Formula One,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to pass which resulted in the cars colliding.

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” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with Alain Prost at Suzuka back in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

While the spirit is similar, the phrasing is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he had no intent to allow Prost beat him at turn one whereas Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he made against his team colleague during the pass. That itself was a result of him clipping the Red Bull of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; the implication being the two teammates clashing was forbidden under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris should be instructed to return the position he gained. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, both will promptly appeal to the team to intervene on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete against each other and strive to maintain strict fairness. Aside from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules over what constitutes fair or unfair – under these conditions, now includes bad luck, strategy and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there is the question of perception.

Of most import for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists on fairness and at what point their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. That is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It will reach a point where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes boss Toto Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I guess the elbows are going to come out a bit more. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and championship implications

For spectators, during this dual battle, increased excitement will probably be welcomed as a track duel instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the other impression from these events isn't very inspiring.

To be fair, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for their interests with successful results. They secured their tenth team championship in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) 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 for resolutions is unedifying. Their competition ought to be determined through racing. Chance and fate will play their part, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the squad to determine if they need to intervene and then cleared up 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. Previously, following the team's decision their drivers swap places at Monza because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair were unequal. Questioned whether he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several difficult situations and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he said post-race. “However finally it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. McLaren have little wriggle room left to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser to just close the books and withdraw from the fray.