🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One would benefit from any conclusive outcome in the championship battle involving Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without resorting to team orders with the championship finale kicks off at the COTA on Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath prompts team tensions

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful debriefs dealt with, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. Norris was almost certainly more than aware about the historical parallels regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate at the last grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight against Piastri, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence which triggered his statement differed completely from incidents characterizing Senna's great rivalries.

“If you fault me for just going on the inside of a big gap then you should not be in F1,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to overtake which resulted in the cars colliding.

The remark seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap which is there you are no longer a racing driver” justification he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost at Suzuka back in 1990, securing him the championship.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

While the spirit is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent to allow Prost beat him through the first corner while Norris did try to execute a clean overtake at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he had with his McLaren teammate as he went through. This incident was a result of him touching the car of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place was “unfair”; suggesting that their collision was verboten by team protocols for racing and Norris ought to be told to give back the place he had made. The team refused, but it was indicative that in any cases of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to intervene in their favor.

Team dynamics and impartiality being examined

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete against each other and strive to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules over what constitutes just or unjust – under these conditions, now includes bad luck, tactical calls and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Of most import for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists as fair and when their perspectives might split from the team's stance. That is when the amicable relationship between the two could eventually – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come a point where minor points count,” said Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff after Singapore. “Then they’ll start to calculate and back-calculate and I suppose aggression will increase further. That's when it begins to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For the audience, during this dual battle, increased excitement will probably be welcomed as a track duel instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Not least because in Formula One the alternative perception from all this is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren are making appropriate choices for themselves and it has paid off. They clinched their tenth team championship in Singapore (though a great achievement diminished by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and upright commander who truly aims to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity versus squad control

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall to decide matters appears unsightly. Their contest ought to be determined through racing. Luck and destiny will play their part, but better to let them simply go at it and see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the team to ascertain whether they need to intervene and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of potentially making a difference that could be critical. Already, following the team's decision for position swaps at Monza due to Norris experiencing a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris won, the shadow of concern about bias also looms.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to see a title constantly disputed over perceived that the efforts to be fair were unequal. When asked if he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“There’s been some challenging moments and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he stated 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 now to simply stop analyzing and step back from the conflict.