Norris compared to Senna versus Oscar Piastri as Alain Prost? Not exactly, however McLaren needs to pray title is settled through racing

The British racing team along with F1 would benefit from any conclusive outcome during this title fight between Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action and without reference to the pit wall as the championship finale kicks off at the Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout leads to internal strain

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and tense debriefs dealt with, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. Norris was almost certainly fully conscious about the historical parallels regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate during the previous grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight against Piastri, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence which triggered his statement differed completely to those that defined the Brazilian’s iconic battles.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting an inside move through an opening then you should not be in Formula One,” Norris said of his opening-lap attempt to overtake which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

His comment appeared to paraphrase Senna’s “If you no longer go for a gap that exists you are no longer a true racer” defence he provided to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with Alain Prost in Japan in 1990, ensuring he took the championship.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

While the spirit is similar, the wording marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he had no intent to allow Prost beat 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 team colleague as he went through. This incident stemmed from him clipping the car of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, immediately declared that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; the implication being the two teammates clashing was verboten under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to give back the place he had made. The team refused, but it was indicative that during disputes of contention, each would quickly ask the squad to step in on his behalf.

Squad management and fairness under scrutiny

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race one another and to try to maintain strict fairness. Quite apart from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes bad luck, strategy and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue of perception.

Most crucially to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by 22 points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and when their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – turn somewhat into the iconic rivalry.

“It will reach a point where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Wolff post-race. “Then they’ll start to calculate and re-calculations and I suppose aggression will increase further. That's when it begins to become thrilling.”

Audience expectations and championship implications

For the audience, during this dual battle, increased excitement will probably be welcomed in the form of a track duel instead of a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Especially since for F1 the alternative perception from all this isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making 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 fuss prompted by their drivers' clash) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they have an ethical and upright commander who truly aims to act correctly.

Sporting integrity versus squad control

Yet having drivers competing for the title appealing to the team to decide matters is unedifying. Their contest should be decided on track. Chance and fate will have roles, but better to let them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the team to determine if they need to intervene and subsequently resolved later in private.

The examination will intensify with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Already, after the team made their drivers swap places at Monza due to Norris experiencing a slow pit stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris won, the shadow of concern of favouritism also looms.

Team perspective and future challenges

No one wants to witness a championship constantly disputed over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. When asked if he believed the squad had acted correctly 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 various aspects,” he stated post-race. “But ultimately it's educational with the whole team.”

Six meetings remain. The team has minimal room for error to do their cramming, so it may be better now to simply stop analyzing and step back from the fray.