Lando Norris compared to Senna versus Piastri as Alain Prost? Not exactly, but McLaren must hope championship gets decided on track

McLaren and F1 could do with anything decisive during this title fight involving Norris and Oscar Piastri getting resolved on the track rather than without reference to team orders as the championship finale kicks off this weekend at COTA starting Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath prompts internal strain

With the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and tense debriefs dealt with, McLaren will be hoping for a reset. Norris was almost certainly fully conscious of the historical context regarding his retort toward his upset colleague at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel against Piastri, that Norris invoked a famous Senna well-known quotes was lost on no one yet the occurrence that provoked his comment differed completely from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

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

His comment seemed to echo Senna’s “If you no longer go an available gap which is there then you cease to be a racing driver” justification he provided to the racing knight following his collision with Alain Prost at Suzuka in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

While the spirit remains comparable, the phrasing is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he had no intent to allow Prost beat him through the first corner while Norris did try to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. In fact, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he had with his team colleague during the pass. That itself stemmed from him touching the car driven by Verstappen ahead of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris gaining the place seemed unjust; suggesting that the two teammates clashing was verboten by team protocols 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 between them, each would quickly ask the squad to intervene on his behalf.

Team dynamics and impartiality being examined

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race against each other and strive to maintain strict fairness. Aside from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules over what constitutes fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers misfortune, strategy and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Of most import to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri leads Norris by 22 points, each racer's view exists as fair and at what point their perspectives might split from the team's stance. That is when the amicable relationship among them could eventually – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It’s going to come to a situation where minor points count,” commented Mercedes boss Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I suppose aggression will increase further. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

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 of circumstances. Not least because in Formula One the alternative perception from these events is not particularly rousing.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking the correct decisions for themselves with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (though a great achievement overshadowed by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they possess a moral and upright commander who truly aims to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity against squad control

However, with racers in a championship fight appealing to the team for resolutions appears unsightly. Their competition ought to be determined on track. Chance and fate will play their part, but better to let them simply go at it and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the squad to determine if intervention is needed and subsequently resolved later in private.

The examination will increase with every occurrence it risks potentially making a difference that could be critical. Previously, following the team's decision their drivers swap places at Monza because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also looms.

Team perspective and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to witness a championship endlessly debated over perceived that the efforts to be fair were unequal. Questioned whether he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“There’s been some difficult situations and we discussed a number of things,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process with the whole team.”

Six races stay. McLaren have little wriggle room left for last-minute adjustments, thus perhaps wiser now to simply close the books and withdraw from the conflict.