🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with Formula One would benefit from any conclusive outcome during this title fight between Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri being decided on the track rather than without resorting to the pit wall as the title run-in kicks off at the Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath prompts team tensions

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful debriefs concluded, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly 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, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence 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 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 appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap which is there then you cease to be a true racer” justification he provided to the racing knight after he ploughed into Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

Although the attitude remains comparable, the phrasing is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him through the first corner whereas Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised even with the glancing blow he had with his McLaren teammate during the pass. This incident was a result of him clipping the car driven by Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, immediately declared that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris should be instructed to give back the position he gained. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, both will promptly appeal to the team to step in on his behalf.

Squad management and impartiality being examined

This comes naturally from McLaren's commendable approach to let their drivers race against each other and strive 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, tactical calls and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there is the question of perception.

Of most import to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and when 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 to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess the elbows are going to come out further. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will probably be welcomed as an on-track confrontation instead of a data-driven decision of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the other impression 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 their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Racing purity versus team management

Yet having drivers in a championship fight looking to the pitwall for resolutions 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, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be pored over by the team to ascertain whether intervention is needed and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will increase and each time it happens it risks possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Already, after the team made for position swaps at Monza due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris won, the shadow of concern of favouritism also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

No one wants to witness a championship constantly disputed because it may be considered that fairness attempts were unequal. Questioned whether he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded that they did, but mentioned it's a developing process.

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

Six races stay. The team has minimal room for error to do their cramming, so it may be better now to simply stop analyzing and step back from the conflict.