McLaren’s decision during the Italian Grand Prix has reignited the debate surrounding team orders in Formula 1. During the race at Monza, Lando Norris lost a position to his teammate, Oscar Piastri, following a slow pit stop. McLaren then instructed the drivers to swap positions, putting Norris back in front of Piastri. While this secured a result for the team, it raised questions about fairness and equality, as well as the potential for unrest within the garage.
Former Formula 1 driver Robert Doornbos was among those weighing in on the decision. Speaking on the Pit Talk Podcast, he described the episode as both unfair and damaging, arguing that the team had overstepped the mark by deciding the outcome of an on-track battle. He warned that similar decisions could resurface later in the season and jeopardise McLaren’s championship challenge.
A familiar Formula 1 story
Team orders are nothing new in Formula 1. Ferrari famously orchestrated race finishes during Michael Schumacher’s dominant years, often frustrating Rubens Barrichello and others in the process.
Sebastian Vettel’s refusal to obey the “multi 21” command at the 2013 Malaysian Grand Prix is a prime example of a driver defying instructions when the championship was at stake. McLaren’s decision in Monza now joins that catalogue, highlighting the fine balance between team objectives and individual ambition.
Doornbos was particularly blunt in his assessment: “This is about the world title,” he said.
“And both of them could become world champions for the first time. They’ve already secured the constructors’ title; now, simply let the best man win.”
The pit stop problem
The controversy stemmed from Norris’s delayed pitstop. Piastri had pitted earlier to cover a threat from behind, while Norris stayed out for an extra lap. Under normal circumstances, Norris would have kept his position on the track. However, a slow wheel change dropped him behind Piastri. McLaren responded by instructing the Australian driver to give up his place.
Doornbos argued that this was an overreaction.
“Norris had the first choice of strategy and said he didn’t want Piastri to get ahead of him. Normally he would have stayed in front, but the poor stop changed that. That’s just racing,” he explained.
The Dutchman suggested that the team management had distorted the natural order of events. “Should Piastri have parked his car at Zandvoort?” he asked rhetorically.
“And if Piastri had a bad stop and lost two places, should Norris then be dropped two places as well? You’re creating chaos within the team.”
Rosberg Warning as Wolff Slams Antonelli
The ‘darling of McLaren’
Underlying the debate is a sense that Norris holds privileged status within McLaren. Doornbos did little to dispel this suspicion, stating bluntly: ‘It seems like Norris is the team’s favourite. It almost feels like he has to win the title.’
He argued that this perception risks undermining team harmony. Piastri currently leads the World Championship standings by 31 points, which is a significant cushion at this stage of the campaign. Forcing him to defer to Norris could be perceived as unfair, especially if the overall picture suggests that the younger driver is the stronger title contender.
Doornbos predicted further tension ahead.
“This will go wrong again. You can’t continue like this,” he warned, hinting at a possible repeat of infamous intra-team rivalries that ended badly for everyone involved.
Lessons from history
Formula 1 history is littered with examples of teammates colliding, both literally and politically. Take Alain Prost and Ayrton Senna at McLaren in the late 1980s, for example.
Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton at Mercedes in the turbo hybrid era.
Even Mark Webber and Sebastian Vettel at Red Bull, where the phrase ‘not bad for a number two driver’ entered the sport’s lexicon.
The Monza incident may not yet rank alongside these explosive sagas, but the potential is clear. Piastri and Norris are closely matched, both are hungry for their first title, and McLaren are finally in a position to compete for championships again. Balancing those forces will be one of the great challenges for the team’s management in the months ahead.
McLaren, a team that once prided itself on robotic efficiency and no-nonsense discipline, appears to have adopted a new philosophy that could be described as ‘parenting two toddlers fighting over a toy’.
Lando is seemingly the golden child, while Oscar, despite leading the World Championship, is being told to share his toys nicely.
Doornbos’s use of the phrase ‘match-fixing’ may be slightly dramatic, but it did not look good. F1 fans thrive on genuine racing and the raw drama of track position being earned or lost in the crucible of competition. When a slow pit stop is overwritten by a team instruction, it can feel as though someone has scribbled over the script of a play that we were all enjoying.
Looking ahead:
The Italian Grand Prix may prove to be a pivotal moment in the title battle. McLaren will now be under close scrutiny, with every call being compared against the Monza precedent. The next few races could determine whether Piastri or Norris will emerge as the true spearhead of the team’s campaign, or whether the team risks fracturing its own momentum.
History tells us that intra-team rivalries rarely end well. Whether or not McLaren can defy that pattern remains to be seen, but Doornbos is far from convinced.
“This will go wrong again,” he repeated. “You can’t continue like this.”
The World Championship fight is delicately poised, and McLaren’s biggest opponent may be themselves rather than Ferrari, Mercedes or Red Bull.
MORE F1 NEWS – Wolff has Alpine on his radar
History suggests that when Formula One undergoes sweeping rule changes, the competitive order can shift dramatically. The last time this happened was in 2014, when hybrid power units were introduced. Mercedes seized the opportunity on that occasion, establishing an era of dominance that lasted nearly a decade and winning eight consecutive Constructors’ titles through to 2021.
With Formula One approaching another round of regulatory changes in 2026, attention naturally turns to whether Mercedes can repeat their success. However, team principal Toto Wolff has cautioned against assuming that past patterns will repeat themselves. He believes that the circumstances this time are very different and that Mercedes may find themselves facing not only rival manufacturers, but also stiff opposition from their own customer teams…READ MORE ON THIS STORY
Craig.J. Alderson is Senior Editor at TJ13, where Craig oversees newsroom operations and coordinates editorial output across the site. With a background in online sports reporting and motorsport magazine editing, he plays a key role in maintaining consistency, speed, and accuracy in TJ13’s coverage.
During race weekends, Craig acts as desk lead, directing contributors, prioritising breaking stories, and ensuring timely publication across a fast-moving news cycle.
Craig’s work focuses heavily on real-time developments in the paddock, including team updates, regulatory decisions, and emerging controversies. This role requires a detailed understanding of Formula 1’s operational flow, from practice sessions through to race-day strategy and post-race fallout.
With experience managing editorial teams, Craig ensures that TJ13 delivers structured, reliable coverage while maintaining the site’s distinctive voice.
Craig has a particular interest in how information moves within the paddock environment, and how rapidly developing stories can be accurately translated into clear, accessible reporting for readers.
With over 30 years of experience in Formula 1 as an insider journalist, I have built trusted connections across the paddock, from race engineers and mechanics to senior team figures. At The Judge 13, I and a handful of trusted colleagues share exclusive Formula 1 news, expert analysis and behind-the-scenes stories you will not find in mainstream motorsport media.
