🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and F1 could do with any conclusive outcome in the championship battle between Norris and Piastri getting resolved on the track and without resorting to the pit wall with the championship finale kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath leads to team tensions

With the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive 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 toward his upset colleague at the last grand prix weekend. During an intense title fight against Piastri, that Norris invoked a famous Senna well-known quotes was lost on no one yet the occurrence which triggered his statement differed completely from incidents characterizing Senna's iconic battles.

“Should you criticize me for just going an inside move of a big gap then you should not be in Formula One,” stated Norris of his opening-lap attempt to overtake that led to the cars colliding.

His comment appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “If you no longer go for a gap that exists then you cease to be a true racer” justification he gave to the racing knight following his collision with Alain Prost in Japan back in 1990, securing him the championship.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

Although the attitude remains comparable, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he never intended to allow Prost beat him through the first corner while Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he had with his team colleague during the pass. That itself was a result of him touching the car of Max Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was verboten by team protocols of engagement and Norris should be instructed to give back the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, but it was indicative that in any cases of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to step in in their favor.

Team dynamics and impartiality under scrutiny

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race against each other and to try to maintain strict fairness. Aside from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules over what constitutes fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers misfortune, tactical calls and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Of most import to the title race, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists as fair and when their perspectives might split from the team's stance. Which is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come a point where minor points count,” said Mercedes team principal Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I suppose the elbows are going to come out a bit more. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will likely be appreciated in the form of an on-track confrontation rather than a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Especially since in Formula One the alternative perception from these events isn't very inspiring.

To be fair, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for their interests with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and with Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Racing purity versus squad control

Yet having drivers in a championship fight looking to the pitwall to decide matters 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 see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be pored over by the team to determine if intervention is needed and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Already, following the team's decision for position swaps in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly 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 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 it's a developing process.

“We've had several challenging moments and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he stated post-race. “However finally it's educational for the entire squad.”

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.