Lando Norris compared to Senna and Oscar Piastri likened to Prost? No, but McLaren must hope championship is settled on track

The British racing team along with F1 could do with anything decisive during this championship battle involving Lando Norris & Piastri getting resolved through on-track action and without resorting to team orders as the title run-in kicks off 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, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. Norris was almost certainly fully conscious of the historical context of his riposte toward his upset colleague at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight against Piastri, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature to those that defined the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“If you fault me for just going on the inside through an opening then you should not be in Formula One,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to overtake which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

The remark seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” defence he gave to the racing knight following his collision with the French champion at Suzuka in 1990, securing him the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

While the spirit 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 did try to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he made against his McLaren teammate as he went through. That itself stemmed from him touching the car driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, immediately declared that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that their collision was forbidden under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris ought to be told to give back the place he had made. The team refused, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to intervene on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete against each other and strive to maintain strict fairness. Aside from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents over what constitutes 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 leads Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and at what point their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. That is when their friendly rapport among them could eventually – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It will reach a point where minor points count,” said 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 begins to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as a track duel instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Especially since in Formula One the alternative perception from all this isn't very inspiring.

To be fair, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for their interests and it has paid off. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as team principal they have an ethical and upright commander who truly aims to do the right thing.

Racing purity versus team management

However, with racers 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 play their part, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be pored over by the team to ascertain whether intervention is needed and then cleared up afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Previously, after the team made for position swaps in Italy because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear about bias also looms.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

No one wants to witness a championship endlessly debated over perceived that fairness attempts were unequal. When asked if he felt the team had acted correctly by both drivers, 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 after Singapore. “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, so it may be better to just stop analyzing and withdraw from the fray.