Lando Norris compared to Ayrton Senna versus Oscar Piastri as Alain Prost? Not exactly, but the team must hope championship gets decided through racing

The British racing team along with Formula One would benefit from any conclusive outcome during this championship battle between Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri being decided through on-track action rather than without resorting to the pit wall as the title run-in kicks off this weekend at Circuit of the Americas on Friday.

Marina Bay race fallout leads to internal strain

After the Singapore Grand Prix’s doubtless extensive and stressful debriefs dealt with, the Woking-based squad will be hoping for a reset. The British driver was likely more than aware of the historical context regarding his retort to his aggrieved teammate at the last grand prix weekend. In a fiercely contested title fight against Piastri, his reference to a famous Senna most famous sentiments was lost on no one but the incident which triggered his statement was of an entirely different nature to those that defined the Brazilian’s great rivalries.

“If you fault me for just going on the inside of a big gap then you should not be in Formula One,” stated Norris of his opening-lap attempt to pass that led to the cars colliding.

His comment seemed to echo the Brazilian legend's “If you no longer go for a gap which is there then you cease to be a racing driver” justification he gave to the racing knight following his collision with the French champion at Suzuka back in 1990, ensuring he took the title.

Similar spirit but different circumstances

While the spirit remains comparable, the wording is where the similarities end. The late champion confessed he never intended to allow Prost beat him through the first corner whereas Norris did try to execute a clean overtake at the Marina Bay circuit. In fact, it was a perfectly valid effort which received no penalty even with the glancing blow he made against his team colleague as he went through. That itself stemmed from him clipping the Red Bull 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 verboten by team protocols of engagement and Norris ought to be told to give back the position he gained. McLaren did not do so, but it was indicative that in any cases between them, both will promptly appeal to the team to step in in their favor.

Squad management and fairness being examined

This comes naturally of McLaren’s laudable efforts to allow their racers compete against each other and strive to maintain strict fairness. Aside from tying some torturous knots when establishing rules about what defines fair or unfair – which, under these auspices, now includes misfortune, tactical calls and racing incidents like in Marina Bay – there remains the issue regarding opinions.

Most crucially to the title race, six races left, Piastri leads Norris by twenty-two points, each racer's view exists on fairness and at what point their opinion may diverge with that of the McLaren pitwall. Which is when the amicable relationship between the two may – finally – turn somewhat into Senna-Prost.

“It’s going to come a point where a few points will matter,” said Mercedes team principal Wolff post-race. “Then calculations will begin and back-calculate and I guess the elbows are going to come out further. That’s when it starts to get interesting.”

Audience expectations and title consequences

For spectators, 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 regarding incidents. Especially since for F1 the other impression from all this isn't very inspiring.

To be fair, McLaren are making the correct decisions for their interests with successful results. They clinched their tenth team championship at Marina Bay (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.

Racing purity versus team management

Yet having drivers in a championship fight looking to the pitwall to decide matters appears unsightly. Their competition should be decided on track. Luck and destiny will have roles, but better to let them just battle freely and see how fortune falls, than the impression that every disputed moment will be pored over by the squad to determine if they need to intervene and subsequently resolved later in private.

The scrutiny will intensify and each time it happens it is in danger of potentially making a difference that could be critical. Already, following the team's decision for position swaps in Italy because Norris had endured a delayed stop and Piastri believing he had been hard done by with the strategy call at Hungary, where Norris won, the shadow of concern about bias also emerges.

Squad viewpoint and upcoming tests

No one wants to see a title endlessly debated over perceived that the efforts to be fair were unequal. When asked if he felt the team had acted correctly toward both racers, Piastri said that they did, but noted it's a developing process.

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

Six races stay. The team has minimal room for error to do their cramming, thus perhaps wiser to just close the books and step back from the conflict.