Norris as Senna versus Oscar Piastri as Prost? No, but McLaren must hope title gets decided on track

McLaren along with F1 would benefit from anything decisive in the title fight involving Lando Norris & Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action and without resorting to the pit wall with the championship finale kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath leads to internal strain

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a fresh start. Norris was almost certainly fully conscious of the historical context regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate at the last race weekend. During an intense title fight with the Australian, that Norris invoked 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 to those that defined the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting 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.

The remark seemed to echo Senna’s “Should you stop attempting for a gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” justification he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with Alain Prost in Japan back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

While the spirit remains comparable, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he never intended of letting Prost to defeat him through the first corner while Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he made against his McLaren teammate as he went through. This incident stemmed from him touching the Red Bull driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; suggesting that their collision was forbidden under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to return the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that during disputes between them, both will promptly appeal the squad to intervene on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete against each other and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents about what defines just or unjust – under these conditions, now covers misfortune, tactical calls and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue of perception.

Most crucially for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and when their perspectives might split from the team's stance. Which is when the amicable relationship between the two could eventually – 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 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, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will probably be welcomed in the form of a track duel instead of a data-driven decision regarding incidents. Not least because for F1 the alternative perception from these events is not particularly rousing.

To be fair, McLaren are making the correct decisions for themselves and it has paid off. They secured their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they have an ethical and principled leader who truly aims to act correctly.

Racing purity versus team management

However, with racers in a championship fight appealing to the team to decide matters is unedifying. Their competition should be decided through racing. Chance and fate will have roles, but better to let them simply go at it and see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be pored over by the team to determine if intervention is needed and then cleared up later in private.

The scrutiny will increase and each time it happens it risks potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Already, following the team's decision for position swaps in Italy due to Norris experiencing 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 about bias also looms.

Team perspective and future challenges

Nobody desires to witness a championship constantly disputed over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. Questioned whether he felt the team had acted correctly by both drivers, Piastri said he believed they had, but mentioned it's a developing process.

“We've had several difficult situations and we discussed a number of things,” he said after Singapore. “However finally it's educational with the whole team.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal room for error for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser now to simply close the books and withdraw from the fray.