🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with F1 could do with anything decisive during this title fight involving Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without resorting to the pit wall as the title run-in begins this weekend at Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath 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 reset. Norris was almost certainly fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte toward his upset colleague at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel against Piastri, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing Senna's great rivalries.

“If you fault me for just going on the inside through an opening then you don't belong in Formula One,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to pass that led to the cars colliding.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “Should you stop attempting for a gap which is there then you cease to be a racing driver” justification he gave to the racing knight after he ploughed into the French champion in Japan in 1990, securing him the title.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

Although the attitude is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him through the first corner whereas 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 during the pass. This incident was a result of him clipping the car driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, instantly stated that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to give back the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, but it was indicative that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to intervene on his behalf.

Squad management and impartiality being examined

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race against each other and strive to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents over what constitutes just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, strategy and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question regarding opinions.

Of most import for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and at what point their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. Which is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes boss Toto Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I suppose the elbows are going to come out further. That's when it begins to become thrilling.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, 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 alternative perception from these events is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren are making appropriate choices for themselves with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they possess a moral and upright commander who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Racing purity against team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title looking to the pitwall to decide matters appears unsightly. Their contest ought to be determined through racing. Chance and fate will have roles, but better to let them simply go at it and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be pored over by the squad to ascertain whether intervention is needed and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of potentially making a difference that could be critical. Previously, after the team made for position swaps in Italy due to Norris experiencing a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear about bias also looms.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to see a title endlessly debated because it may be considered that fairness attempts were unequal. Questioned whether he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“There’s been some challenging moments and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he said post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

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 withdraw from the conflict.