🔗 Share this article Norris as Senna and Oscar Piastri as Alain Prost? Not exactly, however the team needs to pray championship is settled through racing McLaren and Formula One would benefit from any conclusive outcome during this championship battle involving Lando Norris & Piastri being decided through on-track action and without reference to the pit wall as the title run-in kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas on Friday. Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts internal strain After the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses dealt with, McLaren will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was likely fully conscious about the historical parallels regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel against Piastri, that Norris invoked a famous Senna most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence that provoked his comment differed completely to those that defined Senna's great rivalries. “If you fault me for just going an inside move through an opening then you don't belong in Formula One,” Norris said of his opening-lap attempt to pass which resulted in their vehicles making contact. His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap which is there then you cease to be a racing driver” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with Alain Prost at Suzuka back in 1990, ensuring he took the title. Similar spirit yet distinct situations Although the attitude is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended of letting Prost beat him through the first corner whereas Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his McLaren teammate as he went through. That itself was a result of him clipping the Red Bull of Max Verstappen in front of him. The Australian responded angrily and, notably, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; the implication being the two teammates clashing was verboten under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris should be instructed to give back the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that in any cases between them, both will promptly appeal to the team to step in in their favor. Team dynamics and impartiality under scrutiny This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to let their drivers race one another and to try to maintain strict fairness. Aside from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, tactical calls and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there is the question regarding opinions. Of most import to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and when their perspectives might split from the team's stance. Which is when their friendly rapport among them may – finally – become a little bit more Senna-Prost. “It will reach a point where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I suppose the elbows are going to come out further. That's when it begins to get interesting.” Audience expectations and title consequences For the audience, during this dual battle, getting interesting will likely be appreciated in the form of an on-track confrontation rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Especially since for F1 the alternative perception from all this is not particularly rousing. Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for their interests with successful results. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as team principal they have an ethical and principled leader who genuinely wants to act correctly. Sporting integrity against team management However, with racers competing for the title appealing to the team to decide matters is unedifying. Their contest ought to be determined through racing. Luck and destiny will play their part, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be pored over by the team to ascertain whether they need to intervene and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors. The examination will intensify and each time it happens it is in danger of potentially making a difference that could be critical. Previously, after the team made their drivers swap places at Monza due to Norris experiencing a delayed stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear about bias also looms. Squad viewpoint and future challenges No one wants to witness a championship endlessly debated because it may be considered that fairness attempts were unequal. Questioned whether he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said he believed they had, but noted it's a developing process. “There’s been some challenging moments and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he said after Singapore. “However finally it's educational for the entire squad.” Six races stay. McLaren have little wriggle room left to do their cramming, so it may be better now to simply stop analyzing and step back from the conflict.