Norris compared to Senna and Oscar Piastri likened to Prost? Not exactly, but McLaren needs to pray title is settled on track

McLaren along with F1 would benefit from any conclusive outcome during this title fight involving Lando Norris & Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without reference to team orders with the title run-in begins at the COTA starting Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath leads to team tensions

With the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and stressful debriefs dealt with, McLaren will be hoping for a fresh start. Norris was likely fully conscious of the historical context of his riposte to his aggrieved teammate during the previous race weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight with the Australian, his reference to a famous Senna most famous sentiments was lost on no one yet the occurrence which triggered his statement differed completely from incidents characterizing Senna's great rivalries.

“If you fault me for simply attempting on the inside of a big gap then you should not be in F1,” Norris said regarding his first-lap move to overtake that led to their vehicles making contact.

His comment appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “Should you stop attempting for a gap which is there you are no longer a true racer” defence he gave to the racing knight following his collision with Alain Prost at Suzuka in 1990, securing him the title.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

Although the attitude remains comparable, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he never intended of letting Prost to defeat him at turn one whereas Norris did try to make his pass cleanly in Singapore. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate that went unpenalised even with the glancing blow he made against his team colleague as he went through. This incident was a result of him touching the Red Bull of Max Verstappen in front of him.

Piastri reacted furiously and, notably, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; the implication being their collision was forbidden under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris should be instructed to give back the position he gained. The team refused, but it was indicative that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to step in in their favor.

Squad management 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 be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers misfortune, strategy and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue 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 with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when the amicable relationship among them could eventually – become a little bit more the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach to a situation where minor points count,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I guess 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 probably be welcomed as a track duel rather than a data-driven decision of circumstances. Not least because in Formula One the alternative perception from these events isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for their interests with successful results. They secured their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success overshadowed by the fuss prompted by their drivers' clash) and with Stella as squad leader they have an ethical and upright commander who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity versus squad control

However, with racers competing for the title appealing to the team to decide matters appears unsightly. Their contest ought to be determined on track. Chance and fate will have roles, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that every disputed moment will be pored over by the squad to determine if intervention is needed and then cleared up later in private.

The examination will intensify and each time it happens it is in danger of potentially making a difference that could be critical. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps in Italy due to Norris experiencing a slow pit stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by with the strategy call in Budapest, where Norris won, the shadow of concern about bias also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

Nobody desires to witness a championship constantly disputed because it may be considered that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. When asked if 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 challenging moments and we’ve spoken about a number of things,” he said post-race. “But ultimately it’s a learning process 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 conflict.