Lando Norris compared to Ayrton Senna versus Oscar Piastri as Alain Prost? No, but the team must hope title is settled through racing

The British racing team and Formula One could do with any conclusive outcome in the championship battle involving Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved through on-track action rather than without reference to team orders as the title run-in kicks off this weekend at COTA starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath prompts team tensions

After the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and stressful debriefs concluded, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a reset. Norris was almost certainly fully conscious of the historical context 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 one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes was lost on no one yet the occurrence that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“Should you criticize me for just going an inside move through an opening then you don't belong in Formula One,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to pass which resulted in the cars colliding.

The remark appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “If you no longer go an available gap which is there then you cease to be a true racer” defence he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart after he ploughed into Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

While the spirit is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent of letting Prost to defeat him at turn one whereas Norris did try to execute a clean overtake 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 stemmed from him clipping the car driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; the implication being their collision was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris should be instructed to give back the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, but it was indicative that in any cases of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to intervene in their favor.

Team dynamics and fairness under scrutiny

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to let their drivers race one another and strive to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers misfortune, strategy and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there is the question of perception.

Of most import for the championship, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, there is what each driver perceives as fair and at what point their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when their friendly rapport between the two could eventually – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach to a situation where minor points count,” commented Mercedes team principal Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I suppose aggression will increase a bit more. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will likely be appreciated in the form of an on-track confrontation instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Especially since in Formula One 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 (though a great achievement diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they possess a moral and principled leader who truly aims to act correctly.

Sporting integrity against squad control

However, with racers in a championship fight appealing to the team to decide matters appears unsightly. Their contest should be decided through racing. Luck and destiny will play their part, but better to let them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, than the impression that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the team to ascertain whether they need to intervene and subsequently resolved later in private.

The examination will intensify and each time it happens it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Previously, following the team's decision their drivers swap places in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly regarding tactics at Hungary, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also looms.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to witness a championship constantly disputed over perceived that fairness attempts had not been balanced. Questioned whether he believed the squad had managed to do right by both drivers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but noted it's a developing process.

“We've had several challenging moments and we discussed a number of things,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately 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 stop analyzing and step back from the fray.