Lando Norris as Ayrton Senna and Oscar Piastri likened to Prost? Not exactly, but the team must hope championship is settled on track

The British racing team along with F1 would benefit from any conclusive outcome during this title fight between Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided on the track rather than without reference to team orders with the championship finale begins at the Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts team tensions

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful debriefs dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was likely fully conscious about the historical parallels regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate during the previous race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel with the Australian, his reference to a famous Senna well-known quotes was lost on no one but the incident that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature to those that defined Senna's great rivalries.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting on the inside of a big gap then you don't belong in F1,” stated Norris regarding his first-lap move to pass which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

The remark appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “Should you stop attempting an available gap that exists you are no longer a racing driver” defence he gave to the racing knight following his collision with Alain Prost at Suzuka back in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Parallel mindset yet distinct situations

While the spirit remains comparable, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. The late champion confessed he had no intent to allow Prost beat him through the first corner whereas Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty despite the minor contact he made against his team colleague during the pass. That itself was a result of him touching the Red Bull driven by Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, instantly stated that Norris gaining the place was “unfair”; the implication being the two teammates clashing was verboten by team protocols of engagement and Norris should be instructed to give back the position he gained. The team refused, but it was indicative that in any cases between them, each would quickly ask to the team to intervene on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness under scrutiny

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race one another and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules over what constitutes just or unjust – which, under these auspices, now includes misfortune, strategy and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there is the question of perception.

Of most import for the championship, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists as fair and at what point 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’s going to come a point where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I suppose aggression will increase a bit more. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated as an on-track confrontation instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. 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 tenth team championship in Singapore (though a great achievement 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 do the right thing.

Racing purity versus team management

Yet having drivers in a championship fight appealing to the team to decide matters is unedifying. Their competition 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 every disputed moment will be pored over by the squad to ascertain whether they need to intervene and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will intensify and each time it happens it risks possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Already, after the team made for position swaps in Italy because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he was treated unfairly regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also looms.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to see a title endlessly debated because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair were unequal. Questioned whether he felt the team had managed to do right by both drivers, Piastri responded that they did, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several difficult situations and we’ve spoken about various aspects,” he stated 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, so it may be better to just close the books and step back from the fray.