🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with Formula One would benefit from any conclusive outcome during this championship battle between Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action and without reference to the pit wall with the championship finale begins at the Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath leads to team tensions

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and tense debriefs dealt with, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. The British driver was almost certainly fully conscious of the historical context regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate at the last grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight against Piastri, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments was lost on no one but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting on the inside of a big gap then you don't belong in Formula One,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to pass which resulted in the cars colliding.

His comment seemed to echo Senna’s “Should you stop attempting an available gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” defence he provided to the racing knight following his collision with the French champion at Suzuka back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

While the spirit remains comparable, the phrasing is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him at turn one while Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake at the Marina Bay circuit. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his McLaren teammate as he went through. That itself stemmed from him clipping the Red Bull of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; the implication being their collision was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing 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 between them, each would quickly ask 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 maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules over what constitutes just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now covers misfortune, strategy and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Most crucially to the title race, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists on fairness and at what point their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when the amicable relationship among them could eventually – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and back-calculate and I guess aggression will increase further. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For spectators, during this dual battle, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as an on-track confrontation instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Especially since in Formula One the alternative perception from all this is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for themselves and it has paid off. They secured their tenth team championship in Singapore (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and with Stella as squad leader they possess a moral and principled leader who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Racing purity versus squad control

However, with racers in a championship fight appealing to the team for resolutions is unedifying. Their contest ought to be determined through racing. Chance and fate will have roles, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it 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 then cleared up later in private.

The examination will increase and each time it happens it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Already, following the team's decision their drivers swap places in Italy due to Norris experiencing a slow pit stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris won, the shadow of concern of favouritism also emerges.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to witness a championship 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 that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several challenging moments and we discussed a number of things,” he said after Singapore. “But ultimately it's educational for the entire squad.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal wriggle room left for last-minute adjustments, so it may be better to just close the books and step back from the conflict.