Fair play or F1 politics? McLaren’s Monza call in context

Written by Kavi Khandelwal, Edited by Meghana Sree

McLaren’s Monza team orders were met with a range of varying opinions, but how does the situation compare to Hungary 2024 and what does this mean for the team’s future?

The top two in the World Drivers’ Championship are separated by 31 points | Credit: Formula One

Team orders in Formula One have always been flashpoints for controversy and public debate, often signalling a breakdown of trust or a strategic imbalance within a team. They can pit driver against driver and fan against fan, and yet again at the 2025 Italian Grand Prix, McLaren’s handling of such an order was met with much debate and discussion.

Despite the public backlash, both drivers, Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri, defended the call made by the team, a response that stood in stark contrast to past incidents. 

The 2025 Monza incident

The team order at the 2025 Italian Grand Prix was not a strategic masterstroke, but a corrective measure to address an error that in hindsight, could have been avoided. 

Norris had held his position in P2 against his teammate for the majority of the race. He was consistently faster than Piastri and the gap between the two McLaren drivers had remained above four seconds for the majority of the race. 

As the race progressed, McLaren’s strategy was to pit Piastri first to defend against the supposed threat posed by Ferrari’s Charles Leclerc, with Norris, who had been running ahead of his teammate for the entire race, scheduled a stop one lap later. 

A pivotal moment during Norris’ pit stop with a malfunctioning wheel gun on the front-left tyre led to a 5.9 seconds pit stop, dropping him behind Piastri.

The decision to swap was made by the pit wall, not the drivers, and was a direct result of the pit stop sequence, which, when combined with the technical failure, inadvertently altered the on-track positioning. Team Principal Andrea Stella explicitly stated that the swap was intended to restore the positions to what they would have been had the slow pit stop not occurred.

While Piastri initially questioned the order over the radio, believing that a “slow pit-stop was part of racing”, he complied immediately which reflected a high level of trust in the team’s overarching plan. 

Norris’ reaction was equally telling; when asked if he was concerned that Piastri would not let him through, he replied: “No, because it was what we decided as a team and we all agreed on.”

Given the pace of Norris and his lap times being at least two tenths faster, it is possible that if the team hadn’t made the swap, Norris might have overtaken Piastri on merit as well.

2024 Hungary incident for context

To fully understand McLaren’s team dynamics, it is necessary to examine the events of the 2024 Hungarian Grand Prix, which was mentioned in the radio message to Piastri while persuading the championship leader to let Norris through.

McLaren’s 1-2 at the 2024 Hungarian Grand Prix | Credit: Formula One

That race began with a front-row lockout for McLaren, but a stronger start from Piastri saw him take the lead from pole-sitter Norris. The British driver,  pitting one lap earlier than his teammate during the second pit stop, benefitted from the undercut and emerged from the pits ahead of his teammate, seizing the race lead.

This strategic maneuver executed by the team was the sole reason Norris gained the lead, prompting the team’s subsequent attempt to “reinstate the order”. 

Over a series of laps, Norris’ race engineer, Will Joseph, engaged in a prolonged negotiation with his driver to convince him to let his teammate pass.

The messages were not direct commands but persuasive appeals, with Norris questioning the team’s logic and expressing his frustration over the radio. The Australian driver’s own frustration was also audible as he warned the team: “The longer we leave this, the riskier it gets.” 

This communication breakdown created a media narrative of disunity and overshadowed Piastri’s first Grand Prix win. After the race, Norris admitted that giving up the lead “hurt” but was “fair” because he “shouldn’t have won today” after his poor start.

What changed since then?

In contrast to the lengthy radio negotiations in Hungary, in the 2025 Italian Grand Prix, the call was swift and based on a pre-existing agreement. 

This shift was not a coincidence as Stella confirmed that the Monza approach was a direct lesson learned from the Hungarian Grand Prix, as they had “so many conversations after that race and found alignment with each other as to how we go racing”. 

McLaren’s team orders dominated the post-race conversation at Monza | Credit: Formula One

The outcome at Monza demonstrates that McLaren’s leadership has moved beyond managing individual races to building a resilient, principles-based system publicly backed by both Norris and Piastri as seen following Monza.

Implications for McLaren’s future 

This Monza incident provides strong evidence that McLaren maintains a cohesive front in a high-stakes championship battle. 

The ability of Norris and Piastri to trust the team’s decisions and each other is a particularly critical advantage given that McLaren has consistently stated that their policy is to allow the drivers to race freely but “within the boundaries of the team interest coming first”.

The Monza incident was a successful test of the team’s new system but it does not guarantee future harmony. While the rivalry between the two McLaren drivers remains respectful, it is equally intense and will face a number of long-term risks if this is the standard the team has set up for themselves.

Handling the Monza team order has set a new precedent for the team that may be difficult to undo in the future. Sauber’s Team Principal Jonathan Wheatley noted that the swap was likely based on a pre-agreed conversation about what to do in the case of a “team error”.

While Mclaren’s policy aligns with this view, Mercedes’ Team Principal Toto Wolff had a different perspective, stating that teams battling at the front are “between a rock and a hard place”. He believes that while team orders go against the “racing soul”, the “rational side needs to prevail” to avoid losing a championship by a small margin.

Lando Norris [left] and Max Verstappen [right] at the Monza post-race Press Conference | Credit: Formula One

Verstappen also weighed in with a different take to McLaren. After hearing of the swap on his team radio, he laughed and said: “Just because he had a slow stop?” 

Post-race, the four-time world champion concluded that McLaren had “full right” to make their own decision, but his immediate reaction to the swap reflects why the team’s call has been viewed as controversial within the community.

Yet for McLaren, the team’s ability to pre-define its policies, communicate them clearly to their drivers and execute them under pressure demonstrates that both drivers remain compliant with preserving team harmony over chasing individual wills – for the time being.

The inherent pressures of an intra-team championship rivalry will always exist but while this incident suggests that McLaren may finally have the right balance, the effects set by this precedent remain to be seen. 

The challenge now lies in maintaining this fragile unity as the championship fight intensifies and the stakes continue to rise.