🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One could do with anything decisive in the championship battle involving Lando Norris and Piastri getting resolved on the track rather than without reference to the pit wall with the title run-in begins this weekend at COTA starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath leads to internal strain

With the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a fresh start. The British driver was almost certainly more than aware of the historical context of his riposte toward his upset colleague during the previous grand prix weekend. During an intense title fight with the Australian, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes did not go unnoticed but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“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 pass which resulted in the cars colliding.

His comment seemed to echo 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 gave to the racing knight after he ploughed into the French champion in Japan back in 1990, securing him the championship.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

Although the attitude remains comparable, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he never intended to allow Prost to defeat him through the first corner whereas Norris did try to execute a clean overtake at the Marina Bay circuit. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his team colleague as he went through. This incident was a result of him touching the car driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was forbidden under McLaren’s rules for racing 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, each would quickly ask to the team to step in on his behalf.

Squad management and fairness under scrutiny

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete one another and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – under these conditions, now includes bad luck, tactical calls and racing incidents 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 twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and when their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. Which is when the amicable relationship among them could eventually – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come to a situation where minor points count,” commented Mercedes boss Toto Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I guess aggression will increase further. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and championship implications

For spectators, during this dual battle, getting interesting will probably be welcomed in the form of a track duel instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Especially since for F1 the other impression from all this isn't very inspiring.

To be fair, McLaren are making appropriate choices for themselves with successful results. They secured their tenth team championship in Singapore (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as team principal they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Racing purity versus squad control

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall for resolutions appears unsightly. Their contest ought to be determined through racing. Luck and destiny will play their part, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be pored over by the team to determine if they need to intervene and subsequently resolved later in private.

The examination will increase and each time it happens it risks potentially making a difference that could be critical. Previously, after the team made their drivers swap places in Italy due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

No one wants to see a title constantly disputed because it may be considered that fairness attempts had not been balanced. Questioned whether he believed the squad had acted correctly by both drivers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“We've had several challenging moments and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he said post-race. “However finally it's educational 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 close the books and step back from the conflict.