🔗 Share this article

The British racing team and Formula One would benefit from anything decisive during this title fight between Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved on the track rather than without resorting to the pit wall with the championship finale begins this weekend at COTA on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts internal strain

With the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful post-race analyses dealt with, McLaren will be hoping for a fresh start. Norris was almost certainly fully conscious about the historical parallels of his riposte toward his upset colleague during the previous race weekend. During an intense championship duel against Piastri, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence that provoked his comment differed completely from incidents characterizing Senna's iconic battles.

“If you fault me for just going on the inside of a big gap then you should not be in F1,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to pass that led to their vehicles making contact.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap which is there you are no longer a true racer” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into the French champion in Japan back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

While the spirit remains comparable, the wording marks where parallels stop. The late champion confessed he never intended of letting Prost beat him through the first corner whereas Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake at the Marina Bay circuit. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his team colleague during the pass. That itself was a result of 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 forbidden under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris should be instructed to give back the position he gained. The team refused, but it was indicative that during disputes between them, both will promptly appeal the squad to step in on his behalf.

Squad management and fairness being examined

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to let their drivers race one another and to try to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules over what constitutes just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now covers bad luck, tactical calls and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Most crucially for the championship, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists on fairness and at what point their perspectives might split from the team's stance. That is when their friendly rapport between the two could eventually – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach a point where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes team principal Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I suppose aggression will increase further. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and title consequences

For spectators, during this dual battle, getting interesting will probably be welcomed as 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 is taking appropriate choices for themselves with successful results. They secured their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and with Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and principled leader who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Racing purity against squad control

Yet having drivers in a championship fight appealing to the team to decide matters is unedifying. Their contest should be decided on track. Chance and fate will play their part, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be pored over by the team to ascertain whether they need to intervene and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will increase and each time it happens it risks possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps at Monza because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also looms.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to witness a championship endlessly debated because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair were unequal. When asked if he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded that they did, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“There’s been some challenging moments and we discussed various aspects,” he stated after Singapore. “However finally it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal room for error to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser to just stop analyzing and step back from the conflict.