🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with F1 would benefit from any conclusive outcome during this championship battle involving Norris & Piastri being decided through on-track action and without resorting to team orders as the title run-in begins at the COTA on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to team tensions

After the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses concluded, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. Norris was likely fully conscious of the historical context regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate during the previous grand prix weekend. During an intense championship duel against Piastri, that Norris invoked a famous Senna most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“If you fault me for just going on the inside through an opening then you should not be in Formula One,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to overtake that led to the cars colliding.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “Should you stop attempting an available gap which is there you are no longer a racing driver” justification he gave to the racing knight following his collision with the French champion in Japan back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

While the spirit remains comparable, the wording marks where parallels stop. The late champion confessed he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him through the first corner whereas Norris did try to execute a clean overtake at the Marina Bay circuit. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty despite the minor contact he made against his McLaren teammate during the pass. This incident stemmed from him clipping the car driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; the implication being the two teammates clashing was verboten by team protocols of engagement 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 of contention, both will promptly appeal to the team to step in on his behalf.

Squad management and impartiality under scrutiny

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete one another and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents over what constitutes just or unjust – under these conditions, now includes misfortune, tactical calls and on-track occurrences like in Marina Bay – there is the question regarding opinions.

Most crucially to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists as fair and at what point their perspectives might split from the team's stance. That is when their friendly rapport among them may – finally – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

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

Viewer desires and title consequences

For spectators, during this dual battle, getting interesting will probably be welcomed in the form of an on-track confrontation rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Not least because for F1 the alternative perception from all this isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for their interests with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they possess a moral and principled leader who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Racing purity against squad control

However, with racers competing for the title appealing to the team to decide matters appears unsightly. Their competition should be decided on track. Chance and fate will have roles, 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 squad to determine if intervention is needed and subsequently resolved later in private.

The scrutiny will increase and each time it happens it risks possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Already, after the team made for position swaps in Italy due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

Nobody desires to see a title endlessly debated because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. When asked if he felt the team had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but noted it's a developing process.

“There’s been some difficult situations 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 races stay. The team has minimal wriggle room left for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser now to simply close the books and withdraw from the fray.