11/09/2025 14:43
Following the Italian Grand Prix, McLaren found itself engulfed in
controversy surrounding the management of its two drivers – and not
for the first time. The Woking-based squad instructing Oscar
Piastri to move aside for Lando Norris in the closing stages of the
race at Monza has proven contentious. Of course, it was not a case
of unprovoked team orders; it was to right the wrong of Norris'
poor pitstop, which was not his own error but that of the team.
That mistake cost the British driver track position, having been
assured that no undercut from Piastri would take place. But the
catalyst for the uneasy situation was pitting Piastri, who was
behind, first in a move that defies convention in F1 and has stung
McLaren before. It has drawn comparisons to the Hungarian Grand
Prix last season, albeit not without its differences. To further
muddy the waters, it was Norris who suggested it. McLaren could
have overruled the British driver and not agreed to it. It should
have. That alone would have prevented this entire mess. Yes,
Charles Leclerc behind Piastri needed to be covered off, and the
team did not want to risk him falling behind the Ferrari, but was
nothing learned from the Hungaroring? Had Norris come in first and
still suffered the poor pit stop, there would be no obligation to
switch the positions. In that scenario, Piastri would have been
significantly more within his rights to decline any team order -
and it is harder to imagine that call coming anyway. And if the
Australian, stopping second, had endured the slow stop, then tough.
It would have been brutal luck if Leclerc had got past, but McLaren
would not have created the mess it did to anywhere near the same
extent, and it certainly would not have felt the need to intervene.
But the most striking element to all this: why was Norris, in the
heat of a title battle with his team-mate, offering for Piastri to
be pitted first? Why was he offering that at all ? What is needed
is twofold: McLaren must let its drivers determine their own fates,
and in turn, both need to be monomaniacally focused on defeating
the other... The dark side to McLaren's principles The
constructors' championship was sewn up a long time ago. From that
perspective, there is nothing left to play for. It has been down to
dotting the Is and crossing the Ts for months now. There was no
need for Norris to play the team game here. The fact that he is
still thinking with a team-first mentality emphasises the dark side
of the principles McLaren has instilled in its two drivers. At
Monza, that approach is what instigated the mess the papaya outfit
found itself in. It cannot happen again. It forces the team into a
position it does not want to be in, but it will happen again -
unless both drivers start putting themselves first unequivocally.
Neither driver is without the ruthlessness they are so often
accused of lacking; it is merely a case of tapping into it. The
time for that is now. If there can be one silver lining to the
episode in Italy, let it be that. Previously in The Scoop Overblown
suggestions Ultimately, I don't hate the team orders call. It made
sense in the circumstances. It was making the most of a very
difficult - whilst wholly needless and unnecessary - situation.
However, Piastri was understandably aggrieved. Whilst he fell in
line post-race , his team radio exchange with engineer Tom Stallard
said it all - and he said as much in the FIA press conference on
Sunday evening . There are many drivers, including Max Verstappen,
who would not have acquiesced to the instruction - and had Norris
been pitted first, I do not think anyone would have expected
Piastri to, if it had even come. The call by McLaren has divided
opinion. The word precedent and the phrase opened a can of worms
have been bandied about. The idea that one of the McLaren drivers
would let rival cars pass to correct their order on track if their
team-mate fell behind due to a slow stop in some hypothetical
future scenario is a moot point - it simply would not happen. But,
whilst those suggestions are overblown, the point is well-meaning
and cuts to a deeper issue and an inherent risk, which there most
certainly is. To some, it has set a precedent that whenever
misfortune befalls one, the other must pay some sort of price, in
the name of being fair. But what is fair, and where is the line?
What is fair? McLaren is hellbent on ensuring fairness between its
two drivers. To a fault. It overmanaged the situation at Monza and
came off worse for it. Andrea Stella and Zak Brown having their
hands on the scales, in pursuit of parity, have helped guide
McLaren to this point, but that approach can only take the team so
far. They must now relinquish that control. They cannot orchestrate
the championship, and only one driver can win the crown. I've
written about the risk the team exposes itself to with its 'two
number one driver' ethos - in this column - in the past; by trying
to keep both Norris and Piastri happy, it risks making both unhappy
. Here, in trying to manipulate results and overengineer to
maintain fairness, it risks producing an intrinsically unfair
outcome, which is why it must now take a step back. What is needed
is twofold: McLaren must let its drivers determine their own fates,
and in turn, both need to be monomaniacally focused on defeating
the other. Do not consider the other in the strategy. Take what you
can, when you can. Stella and Brown must trust their drivers will
engage in battle cleanly. If they cannot, that is where
intervention is justified. Both Norris and Piastri have spoken
about wanting a long-term partnership, and neither wants to upset
the apple cart, so do their bosses really have reason to worry? No
one is saying do not race respectfully, and that it is
no-holds-barred in wheel-to-wheel combat, but McLaren needs to
loosen its grip on the drivers' title fight. And if the team cannot
hand the reins to Norris and Piastri, the pair must seize control
of the title fight on track, together.
