🔗 Share this article

The British racing team along with Formula One would benefit from anything decisive during this title fight between Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without resorting to the pit wall with the championship finale kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath prompts team tensions

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses concluded, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. The British driver was almost certainly more than aware about the historical parallels regarding his retort toward his upset colleague during the previous grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight with the Australian, that Norris invoked a famous Senna well-known quotes did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence that provoked his comment differed completely from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting an inside move of a big gap then you should not be in F1,” Norris said of his opening-lap attempt to pass that led to the cars colliding.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, securing him the championship.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

Although the attitude is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent of letting Prost beat him at turn one whereas Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised even with the glancing blow he made against his McLaren teammate as he went through. This incident stemmed from him clipping the car of Max Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, immediately declared that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; the implication being the two teammates clashing was forbidden by team protocols of engagement and Norris should be instructed to return the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that during disputes between them, both will promptly appeal to the team to intervene in their favor.

Squad management and impartiality being examined

This is part and parcel 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 fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now covers bad luck, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Of most import for the championship, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists on fairness and when their perspectives might split from the team's stance. That is when their friendly rapport among them may – finally – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

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

Audience expectations and championship implications

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will probably be welcomed in the form of an on-track confrontation rather than a data-driven decision of circumstances. Not least because for F1 the other impression from these events isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for their interests and it has paid off. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (though a great achievement diminished by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they possess a moral and upright commander who truly aims to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity versus squad control

However, with racers in a championship fight appealing to the team to decide matters appears unsightly. Their contest should be decided on track. Luck and destiny will have roles, but better to let them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the team to determine if they need to intervene and then cleared up later in private.

The examination will intensify with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made for position swaps at Monza due to Norris experiencing a slow pit stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

No one wants to witness a championship endlessly debated because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair were unequal. Questioned whether he believed the squad had acted correctly by both drivers, Piastri said that they did, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“We've had several difficult situations and we discussed a number of things,” he said post-race. “However finally it's educational for the entire squad.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal room for error to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser now to simply close the books and withdraw from the fray.