🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One could do with any conclusive outcome in the championship battle between Norris & Oscar Piastri getting resolved on the track and without resorting to team orders with the title run-in begins at the Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to internal strain

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses concluded, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a fresh start. Norris was likely 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 against Piastri, his reference to a famous Senna most famous sentiments was lost on no one yet the occurrence that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing Senna's iconic battles.

“If you fault me for just going on the inside of a big gap then you don't belong in F1,” stated Norris of his opening-lap attempt to overtake which resulted in the cars colliding.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with the French champion at Suzuka back in 1990, securing him the title.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

While the spirit is similar, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he never intended of letting Prost beat him at turn one whereas Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he had with his team colleague as he went through. This incident stemmed from him touching the car driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; the implication being their collision was forbidden under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris should be instructed to return the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that during disputes between them, both will promptly appeal to the team to step in on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete one another and to try to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules about what defines just or unjust – under these conditions, now covers bad luck, strategy and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Of most import to the title race, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and at what point their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It will reach a point where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes team principal Wolff after Singapore. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I guess the elbows are going to come out a bit more. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as an on-track confrontation rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Not least because in Formula One 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 clinched their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they possess a moral and upright commander who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Racing purity against team management

Yet having drivers in a championship fight appealing to the team to decide matters is unedifying. Their competition should be decided on track. Chance and fate will play their part, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it and see how fortune falls, than the impression that each contentious incident will be pored over by the team to ascertain whether they need to intervene and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will intensify and each time it happens it is in danger of potentially making a difference that could be critical. Already, following the team's decision their drivers swap places in Italy because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also emerges.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. When asked if he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded that they did, 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 for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal room for error for last-minute adjustments, so it may be better to just close the books and withdraw from the conflict.