Lando Norris compared to Ayrton Senna and Oscar Piastri as Prost? Not exactly, but the team needs to pray championship is settled on track

The British racing team and Formula One could do with anything decisive in the title fight between Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided on the track rather than without resorting to the pit wall as the championship finale kicks off at the Circuit of the Americas starting Friday.

Singapore Grand Prix fallout leads to team tensions

After the Marina Bay event’s doubtless extensive and stressful debriefs concluded, McLaren will be hoping for a fresh start. The British driver was likely more than aware about the historical parallels regarding his retort toward his upset colleague during the previous race weekend. In a fiercely contested championship duel against Piastri, his reference to one of Ayrton Senna’s most famous sentiments did not go unnoticed but the incident which triggered his statement differed completely from incidents characterizing the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“Should you criticize me for simply attempting an inside move through an opening then you don't belong in F1,” stated Norris of his opening-lap attempt to overtake that led to their vehicles making contact.

The remark seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap that exists you are no longer a true racer” defence he provided to the racing knight following his collision with Alain Prost at Suzuka back in 1990, securing him the championship.

Similar spirit yet distinct situations

While the spirit remains comparable, the phrasing marks where parallels stop. Senna later admitted he had no intent to allow Prost to defeat him at turn one while Norris attempted to execute a clean overtake in Singapore. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty despite the minor contact he made against his team colleague as he went through. This incident was a result of him touching the car of Max Verstappen ahead of him.

The Australian responded angrily and, notably, instantly stated that Norris's position gain was “unfair”; the implication being their collision was forbidden under McLaren’s rules for racing and Norris ought to be told to give back the position he gained. The team refused, but it was indicative that in any cases of contention, each would quickly ask to the team to intervene on his behalf.

Squad management and fairness being examined

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to let their drivers race against each other and strive to be as scrupulously fair. Quite apart from tying some torturous knots in setting precedents about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes misfortune, strategy and racing incidents such as in Singapore – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Most crucially for the championship, with six meetings remaining, Piastri is ahead of Norris by twenty-two points, there is what each driver perceives on fairness and at what point their opinion may diverge from the team's stance. That is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – become a little bit more Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come a point where a few points will matter,” commented Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff after Singapore. “Then calculations will begin and re-calculations and I guess the elbows are going to come out further. That's when it begins to get interesting.”

Viewer desires 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 regarding incidents. Especially since for F1 the other impression from these events isn't very inspiring.

Honestly speaking, McLaren is taking appropriate choices for themselves with successful results. They clinched their 10th constructors’ title at Marina Bay (though a great achievement overshadowed by the controversy from the Norris-Piastri moment) and in Andrea Stella as team principal they have an ethical and principled leader who genuinely wants to do the right thing.

Sporting integrity 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 have roles, but better to let them just battle freely and observe outcomes naturally, than the impression that each contentious incident will be pored over by the squad to determine if intervention is needed and subsequently resolved afterwards behind closed doors.

The scrutiny will increase with every occurrence it risks possibly affecting outcomes that could be critical. Previously, after the team made their drivers swap places in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri feeling he had been hard done by regarding tactics in Budapest, where Norris won, the spectre of a fear of favouritism also looms.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

Nobody desires to see a title endlessly debated over perceived that the efforts to be fair had not been balanced. When asked if he felt the team had managed to do right toward both racers, Piastri responded he believed they had, but mentioned it's a developing process.

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

Six races stay. McLaren have little room for error to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser to just close the books and step back from the fray.