🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One could do with anything decisive during this championship battle involving Norris and Piastri being decided through on-track action and without reference to team orders as the title run-in kicks off at the Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to internal strain

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful debriefs dealt with, McLaren will be hoping for a fresh start. Norris was almost certainly fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate during the previous race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel with the Australian, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed but the incident that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature to those that defined Senna's iconic battles.

“If you fault me for simply attempting an inside move through an opening then you don't belong in Formula One,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to overtake which resulted in the cars colliding.

His comment seemed to echo Senna’s “If you no longer go an available gap that exists then you cease to be a racing driver” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with Alain Prost in Japan back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

Although the attitude remains comparable, the wording is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended of letting Prost to defeat him at turn one while Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his team colleague during the pass. That itself was a result of him clipping the car driven by Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, instantly stated that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; the implication being their collision 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, but it was indicative that during disputes of contention, both will promptly appeal the squad to step in in their favor.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to let their drivers race one another and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents over what constitutes just or unjust – under these conditions, now includes bad luck, strategy and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there is the question of perception.

Of most import to the title race, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and when their perspectives might split from the team's stance. That is when their friendly rapport among them could eventually – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “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 begins to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will likely be appreciated in the form of an on-track confrontation rather than a data-driven decision of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the other impression from these events isn't very inspiring.

To be fair, McLaren are making appropriate choices for their interests and it has paid off. They secured their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the fuss prompted by their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to do the right thing.

Racing purity against team management

Yet having drivers in a championship fight looking to the pitwall to decide matters is unedifying. Their contest should be decided on track. Chance and fate will play their part, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be pored over by the team to ascertain whether 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 that could be critical. Already, following the team's decision their drivers swap places at Monza due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

No one wants to witness a championship constantly disputed over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. Questioned whether he believed the squad had acted correctly by both drivers, Piastri said that they did, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several challenging moments and we discussed a number of things,” he stated after Singapore. “But ultimately it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal wriggle room left to do their cramming, so it may be better now to simply stop analyzing and withdraw from the conflict.