🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One would benefit from any conclusive outcome in the title fight between Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved on the track rather than without reference to team orders with the championship finale kicks off this weekend at COTA starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts team tensions

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a reset. The British driver was almost certainly more than aware of the historical context of his riposte toward his upset colleague at the last grand prix weekend. During an intense championship duel with the Australian, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes was lost on no one but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“Should you criticize me for just going an inside move of a big gap then you should not be in F1,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to overtake which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

The remark seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “Should you stop attempting for a gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” defence he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into the French champion at Suzuka back in 1990, securing him the title.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

Although the attitude remains comparable, the wording marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he never intended of letting Prost beat him through the first corner whereas Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. 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 Red Bull of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; suggesting that their collision was forbidden under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris should be instructed to give back the position he gained. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that in any cases between them, each would quickly ask the squad to step in on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness under scrutiny

This comes naturally from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete against each other and to try to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes misfortune, tactical calls and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue of perception.

Of most import for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists as fair and when their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. That is when their friendly rapport between the two may – finally – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come a point where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I suppose the elbows are going to come out further. That's when it begins to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as 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 the correct decisions for their interests and it has paid off. They secured their tenth team championship in Singapore (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus squad control

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall for resolutions is unedifying. Their competition should be decided through racing. Chance and fate will play their part, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that every disputed moment will be pored over by the squad to determine if they need to intervene and then cleared up later in private.

The scrutiny will increase and each time it happens it risks possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Already, following the team's decision 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 triumphed, the shadow of concern about bias also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

Nobody desires to witness a championship endlessly debated because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair were unequal. When asked if he felt the team had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several challenging moments and we discussed a number of things,” he stated post-race. “However finally it's educational with the whole team.”

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 withdraw from the fray.