Norris as Ayrton Senna and Piastri likened to Prost? Not exactly, however McLaren needs to pray championship is settled through racing

The British racing team and Formula One would benefit from any conclusive outcome during this title fight between Lando Norris & Piastri getting resolved on the track rather than without resorting to team orders as the title run-in kicks off at the Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix aftermath leads to team tensions

After the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful debriefs dealt with, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. Norris was likely fully conscious of the historical context of his riposte toward his upset colleague during the previous race weekend. During an intense title fight with the Australian, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence that provoked his comment was of an entirely different nature from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“If you fault me for simply attempting an inside move through an opening then you don't belong in Formula One,” stated Norris of his opening-lap attempt to overtake that led to the cars colliding.

The remark appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go an available gap that exists then you cease to be a true racer” defence he gave to the racing knight following his collision with the French champion at Suzuka back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

Although the attitude is similar, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he never intended of letting Prost beat him at turn one whereas Norris attempted to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised despite the minor contact he made against his team colleague as he went through. This incident 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 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, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to step in on his behalf.

Squad management and fairness under scrutiny

This is part and parcel from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete against each other and to try to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers bad luck, tactical calls and on-track occurrences such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

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 with that of the McLaren pitwall. That is when their friendly rapport among them could eventually – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come to a situation where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes boss Toto Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess the elbows are going to come out further. That’s when it starts to become thrilling.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For spectators, in what is a two-horse race, increased excitement will probably be welcomed in the form of an on-track confrontation 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 is taking appropriate choices for themselves with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the controversy from their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they possess a moral and upright commander who truly aims to act correctly.

Racing purity against team management

However, with racers competing for the title appealing to the team for resolutions is unedifying. Their competition ought to be determined on track. Luck and destiny will have roles, yet preferable to allow them simply go at it and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that every disputed moment will be analyzed intensely by the team to ascertain whether intervention is needed and then cleared up later in private.

The examination will intensify and each time it happens it risks potentially making a difference that could be critical. Previously, following the team's decision their drivers swap places at Monza due to Norris experiencing a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to see a title constantly disputed because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair were unequal. Questioned whether he believed the squad had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but mentioned that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several challenging moments and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he stated post-race. “However finally it's educational with the whole team.”

Six races stay. McLaren have little room for error for last-minute adjustments, so it may be better now to simply stop analyzing and withdraw from the conflict.