The writer of this article already said it at the end of the Italian Grand Prix: "In its quest to 'do the right thing' at Monza, McLaren seriously risks complicating its future. 'Doing the right thing' from now on could soon turn into a significant headache, a real tunnel where every decision is the wrong one, according to on one side or the other."
Well, it didn't take too long for those words to become real facts. In Singapore, we witnessed an episode that - according to the principle of doing “the right thing” - was handled very badly by McLaren, revealing a blatant inconsistency. Let's go through it all.
The incident
Piastri and Norris started from third and fifth on the grid respectively at Marina Bay. Thanks to an excellent start, the Brit immediately overtook Antonelli, before braking late in an attempt to overtake his teammate (and direct rival for the title) at turn 2.
Being aware of the other's move, Oscar left all the space needed to avoid contact. Yet, his cautious approach did not pay off: Lando went wide at the apex, collided with Verstappen and literally bounced off into the path of the other McLaren.
The result? Norris took third place from Piastri and held it for the rest of the race. The Australian was furious with the team, who abandoned him to his fate. This was far from 'right', especially considering what happened in Monza.
Strangely, the stewards did not impose any sanctions on the incident, despite the fact that the Englishman did not keep control of his car. This is one of the variables - according to the Sporting Regulations - necessary to complete a fair overtaking manoeuvre.
The FIA did not want to take a decision that could potentially be decisive for the World Championship. This was certainly not an honourable choice, albeit understandable. On the other hand, McLaren's handling of the situation is incomprehensible...
This time there was no “right thing to do”?
In this case - frankly, it is redundant to specify - “the right thing” would have been to give the position back to car number 81 and let the pair go at it again, given that the Brit gained an advantage with a reckless attack.
However, the much-loved “McLaren principles” did not come into play this time. This time, it was decided - as Piastri's race engineer, Tom Stallard, said - that it would have been discussed after the race.
What remains, however, is a questionable decision, to say the least. Let's be clear: McLaren had the chance to even the score with Monza (literally, given that there was a 3-point gap between one position and the other in this case as well).
Yet, this scenario was not considered “unfair”. So, according to the team's “principles”, having a slow pit stop is unfair, while overtaking the other driver by hitting him is fair. A contradiction that is really difficult to explain.
Piastri's reaction says it all
As far as we can tell from the outside, the only “principle” of the confusing “Papaya Rules” is inconsistency.
Piastri also seemed to align with this feeling: he not only complained many times during the Singapore Grand Prix, but he also shut off the radio link when Zak Brown (the team's CEO) was thanking him for winning the tenth constructors' title in the team's history.
In six races, if not sooner, we will find out who will be the World Driver's Champion in 2025. In the meantime, one thing is for certain: Piastri will remember what happened at Monza and in Singapore, if the trophy does not bear his name.
Read also: Young fans don’t care about Formula 1’s history, or so Domenicali thinks
All the news, photos, weather, session times and times from the Singapore GP 2025
