Norris as Senna versus Oscar Piastri likened to Alain Prost? No, but McLaren must hope championship gets decided through racing

The British racing team and F1 could do with anything decisive during this championship battle involving Norris & Piastri being decided on the track rather than without reference to team orders as the title run-in begins at the COTA on Friday.

Marina Bay race aftermath leads to team tensions

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s undoubtedly thorough and tense post-race analyses dealt with, the Woking-based squad is aiming for a fresh start. The British driver was almost certainly more than aware about the historical parallels regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate during the previous grand prix weekend. During an intense title fight against Piastri, that Norris invoked a famous Senna well-known quotes did not go unnoticed yet the occurrence which triggered his statement differed completely to those that defined Senna's iconic battles.

“If you fault me for just going on the inside through an opening then you don't belong in F1,” Norris said of his opening-lap attempt to pass which resulted in their vehicles making contact.

The remark appeared to paraphrase the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap that exists you are no longer a true racer” justification he gave to Sir Jackie Stewart following his collision with Alain Prost in Japan back in 1990, securing him the title.

Parallel mindset but different circumstances

Although the attitude is similar, the wording is where the similarities end. Senna later admitted he never intended of letting Prost beat him through the first corner while Norris did try to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort that went unpenalised even with the glancing blow he had with his team colleague as he went through. That itself was a result of him touching the Red Bull of Max Verstappen in front of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, significantly, instantly stated that Norris's position gain seemed unjust; suggesting that their collision was forbidden under McLaren’s rules of engagement and Norris should be instructed to give back the place he had made. McLaren did not do so, yet it demonstrated that during disputes of contention, both will promptly appeal the squad to step in on his behalf.

Team dynamics and fairness being examined

This comes naturally from McLaren's commendable approach to allow their racers compete against each other and to try to maintain strict fairness. Aside from creating complex dilemmas in setting precedents over what constitutes fair or unfair – under these conditions, now covers misfortune, tactical calls and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there is the question of perception.

Of most import to the title race, with six meetings remaining, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists as fair and when their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. 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,” said Mercedes boss Toto Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess aggression will increase a bit more. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For the audience, in what is a two-horse race, getting interesting will probably be welcomed in the form of a track duel rather than a spreadsheet-based arbitration regarding incidents. Especially since in Formula One the other impression from all this isn't very inspiring.

To be fair, McLaren are making appropriate choices for their interests and it has paid off. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title in Singapore (though a great achievement overshadowed by the fuss prompted by the Norris-Piastri moment) and with Stella as team principal they possess a moral and upright commander who truly aims to act correctly.

Racing purity versus squad control

Yet having drivers competing for the title appealing to the team for resolutions appears unsightly. Their contest should be decided on track. Luck and destiny will play their part, but better to let them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, rather than the sense that each contentious incident will be analyzed intensely by the squad to determine if they need to intervene and then cleared up later in private.

The examination will intensify with every occurrence it is in danger of possibly affecting outcomes which might prove decisive. Previously, after the team made for position swaps at Monza because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri believing he was treated unfairly regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the shadow of concern about bias also looms.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated over perceived that fairness attempts had not been balanced. Questioned whether he believed the squad had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but noted that it was an ever-evolving approach.

“We've had several difficult situations and we discussed a number of things,” he said post-race. “But ultimately it's educational for the entire squad.”

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