🔗 Share this article

McLaren and Formula One could do with anything decisive during this championship battle involving Norris and Piastri getting resolved on the track and without reference to the pit wall as the title run-in begins at the Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath prompts internal strain

After the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses dealt with, McLaren will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly fully conscious of the historical context regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate at the last grand prix weekend. During an intense championship duel against Piastri, his reference to a famous Senna well-known quotes was lost on no one but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“Should you criticize me for just going an inside move of a big gap then you should not be in Formula One,” stated Norris of his opening-lap attempt to overtake that led to the cars colliding.

His comment appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “Should you stop attempting an available gap that exists you are no longer a true racer” justification he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost at Suzuka in 1990, securing him the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

Although the attitude remains comparable, the phrasing is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he had no intent to allow Prost beat him through the first corner while Norris did try to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised even with the glancing blow he had with his McLaren teammate as he went through. That itself was a result of him clipping the Red Bull driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, but it was indicative that in any cases between them, each would quickly ask to the team to step in in their favor.

Team dynamics and impartiality being examined

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete one another and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes misfortune, tactical calls and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there is the question regarding opinions.

Of most import to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and when their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. That is when their friendly rapport between the two may – finally – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It will reach a point where minor points count,” said Mercedes boss Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I suppose aggression will increase a bit more. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For the audience, during this dual battle, increased excitement will probably be welcomed in the form of a track duel rather than a data-driven decision of circumstances. Especially since in Formula One the other impression from all this is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for their interests with successful results. They clinched their tenth team championship in Singapore (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they have an ethical and principled leader who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity versus squad control

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall to decide matters is unedifying. Their contest should be decided through racing. Luck and destiny will have roles, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the squad to ascertain whether they need to intervene and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will intensify with every occurrence it risks potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made for position swaps 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 shadow of concern about bias also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. Questioned whether he believed the squad had managed to do right 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 discussed various aspects,” he said after Singapore. “But ultimately it’s a learning process for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. McLaren have little room for error to do their cramming, so it may be better now to simply stop analyzing and withdraw from the conflict.