🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and F1 would benefit from any conclusive outcome during this championship battle between Lando Norris and Piastri being decided on the track and without reference to the pit wall as the title run-in begins this weekend at Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to internal strain

After the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and stressful debriefs dealt with, McLaren will be hoping for a fresh start. The British driver was almost certainly fully conscious about the historical parallels regarding his retort toward his upset colleague during the previous grand prix weekend. During an intense championship duel with the Australian, his reference to a famous Senna well-known quotes 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 simply attempting on the inside of a big gap then you should not be in F1,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to overtake that led to their vehicles making contact.

The remark seemed to echo Senna’s “If you no longer go for a gap which is there then you cease to be a true racer” defence he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with the French champion at Suzuka in 1990, securing him the championship.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

Although the attitude remains comparable, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent of letting Prost to defeat 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 despite the minor contact he made against his McLaren teammate during the pass. This incident was a result of him touching the car driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, instantly stated that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; the implication being their collision was verboten under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that during disputes between them, each would quickly ask to the team to step in in their favor.

Team dynamics and impartiality being examined

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete against each other and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – under these conditions, now includes misfortune, strategy and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Of most import for the championship, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists as fair and at what point their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. Which is when the amicable relationship between the two could eventually – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach a point where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes boss Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I suppose the elbows are going to come out a bit more. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will probably be welcomed as an on-track confrontation rather than a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Especially since for F1 the other impression from all this isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making appropriate choices for their interests and it has paid off. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to act correctly.

Racing purity against team management

Yet having drivers competing for the title appealing to the team to decide matters appears unsightly. Their competition ought to be determined through racing. Chance and fate will have roles, but better to let them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be pored over by the squad to ascertain whether they need to intervene and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Already, following the team's decision for position swaps in Italy due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also emerges.

Team perspective and future challenges

Nobody desires to see a title constantly disputed over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. Questioned whether he believed the squad had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but noted it's a developing process.

“There’s been some challenging moments and we discussed various aspects,” 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 to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser now to simply close the books and step back from the fray.