🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and F1 could do with anything decisive in the championship battle involving Norris and Piastri getting resolved on the track rather than without reference to team orders as the championship finale kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to team tensions

After the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a fresh start. Norris was likely fully conscious about the historical parallels regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate during the previous grand prix weekend. During an intense title fight with the Australian, his reference to a famous Senna well-known quotes was lost on no one yet the occurrence which triggered his statement differed completely from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

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

His comment appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “Should you stop attempting an available gap that exists then you cease to be a racing driver” justification he gave to the racing knight after he ploughed into the French champion at Suzuka back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

Although the attitude remains comparable, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent of letting Prost beat him at turn one whereas Norris did try to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort 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 Red Bull of Max Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; the implication being the two teammates clashing was forbidden under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris should be instructed to give back the position he gained. The team refused, but it was indicative that in any cases of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to intervene in their favor.

Squad management and fairness being examined

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete against each other and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules over what constitutes fair or unfair – under these conditions, now includes misfortune, tactical calls and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there is the question of perception.

Most crucially for the championship, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and when their perspectives might split from the team's stance. Which is when their friendly rapport between the two may – finally – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come a point where minor points count,” said Mercedes boss Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I guess the elbows are going to come out further. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will probably be welcomed as a track duel rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Especially since in Formula One the alternative perception from all this is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for themselves and it has paid off. They secured their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (though a great achievement diminished by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and with Stella as team principal they possess a moral and principled leader who truly aims to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus team management

However, with racers in a championship fight appealing to the team to decide matters is unedifying. Their competition ought to be determined on track. Luck and destiny will have roles, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the squad to ascertain whether they need to intervene and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will intensify and each time it happens it risks potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps at Monza because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear about bias also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

Nobody desires to see a title constantly disputed over perceived that fairness attempts 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 difficult situations and we discussed a number of things,” he stated post-race. “However finally it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

Six races stay. 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 fray.