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

McLaren and Formula One would benefit from any conclusive outcome in the title fight involving Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided on the track rather than without resorting to the pit wall with the championship finale kicks off at the Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout prompts internal strain

With the Marina Bay event’s undoubtedly thorough and stressful post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. The British driver was likely more than aware of the historical context regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate at the last race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel with the Australian, that Norris invoked one of Ayrton Senna’s well-known quotes was lost on no one but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined Senna's great rivalries.

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

His comment seemed to echo Senna’s “If you no longer go for a gap which is there 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, securing him the championship.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

Although the attitude is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended to allow Prost beat him through the first corner while Norris did try to make his pass cleanly at the Marina Bay circuit. Indeed, his maneuver was legitimate which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he had with his McLaren teammate during the pass. That itself stemmed from him touching the Red Bull of Max Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, immediately declared that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; the implication being their collision was forbidden by team protocols for racing and Norris ought to be told to return the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that in any cases between them, both will promptly appeal the squad to step in on his behalf.

Team dynamics and impartiality being examined

This is part and parcel of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete one another and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Aside from creating complex dilemmas when establishing rules over what constitutes fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now covers bad luck, tactical calls and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Of most import to the title race, six races left, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists as fair and when their perspectives might split from the team's stance. That is when their friendly rapport between the two may – finally – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It will reach to a situation where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes boss Wolff after Singapore. “Then they’ll start to calculate and back-calculate and I guess the elbows are going to come out further. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Viewer desires and championship implications

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will likely be appreciated in the form of a track duel rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration of circumstances. Especially since in Formula One the other impression from these events isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren are making the correct decisions for their interests and it has paid off. They secured their tenth team championship in Singapore (albeit a brilliant success diminished by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as team principal they have an ethical and principled leader who genuinely wants to act correctly.

Racing purity against team management

Yet having drivers in a championship fight appealing to the team to decide matters is unedifying. Their contest should be decided on track. Chance and fate will play their part, yet preferable to allow them just battle freely 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 afterwards behind closed doors.

The examination will increase with every occurrence it is in danger of potentially making a difference which might prove decisive. Previously, following the team's decision for position swaps at Monza because Norris had endured a slow pit stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris triumphed, the spectre of a fear about bias also looms.

Squad viewpoint and future challenges

No one wants to witness a championship constantly disputed 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 he believed they had, but noted it's a developing process.

“There’s been some difficult situations and we discussed a number of things,” he said after Singapore. “However finally it's educational with the whole team.”

Six races stay. The team has minimal room for error for last-minute adjustments, so it may be better now to simply stop analyzing and withdraw from the conflict.