McLaren’s decision to forbid its drivers from racing each other for three laps during the Australian Grand Prix was justified because of the conditions, says Lando Norris.
The team told Oscar Piastri to hold position behind him while the pair were running first and second between laps 29 and 32 of the race. They gave the instruction after telling Piastri they were approaching the Haas cars of Esteban Ocon and Oliver Bearman to lap them.Meanwhile Norris was told “don’t worry about Oscar for now” while the team “clear backmarkers and make the transition”.
Piastri had closed to within six-tenths of a second when the instruction was given. By the time it was lifted the gap between them had risen to 2.7 seconds, as Piastri had run wide in turn six.
Norris said the team was correct to impose the order while they lapped backmarkers, which potentially involved going off the racing line onto much wetter parts of the track.
“I didn’t really know about it because they said it to Oscar, not to me,” he said. “And it was literally just for two or three laps as we went through the backmarkers.
“It was risky conditions, and we’d look like complete idiots if we attempted to race and both ended up off the track, or worse, out of the race, when we had a great result in hand. It was just for a couple of laps that they asked us to hold position, and then he was free to race again.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
After the pair passed the Haas drivers, Piastri asked the team “are we still holding?” He was told “hold for now.” The team changed the instruction on the next lap.
“We were free to race all the way up until that point and then there was just a holding period for a few laps,” he said. “After that, it was back to normal. I think that’s all I really knew about it.”
McLaren drew criticism last year for declining to impose orders upon their drivers even as Norris closed on Max Verstappen in the championship standings. Norris said they will continue to evolve their tactics.
“I’m sure we’ll talk about it more, we even had a little chat about it this morning,” he said. “But from the team’s perspective, it wasn’t about me or Oscar, it was about McLaren – we’re first and second, let’s not do anything silly when we don’t need to.
“There’s still a lot of opportunity left for Oscar to race me, and it would have been stupid to try and force a situation when we’re behind backmarkers, blue flags. If you go off-line at that part of the race, you’re in the wall.
“At that stage of the race, I was still [thinking] I need to get these tyres to last until lap 54 or whatever. I think Oscar was just pushing a bit more and trying to get past me. But it was all comfortable from my side.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
This article will be updated
Miss nothing from RaceFans
Get a daily email with all our latest stories - and nothing else. No marketing, no ads. Sign up here:
2025 Chinese Grand Prix
- Red Bull reassure Verstappen over ‘when we’ll have a winning car again’ in meeting
- Mercedes explain impact of Antonelli’s floor damage on his Chinese GP performance
- “I gave a lot of lap time away in that first stint”: Verstappen’s full Chinese GP radio
- Stats: Chinese Grand Prix saw most disqualifications in an F1 race for 21 years
- Even the best driver on the grid needs a team mate to push them – Norris
Coventry Climax
20th March 2025, 11:37
So they are free to race, except under certain ‘conditions’.
Conditions being what the pitwall’s mood is like?
I always thought the point of racing was being quicker than anyone else and beat them to the finish whatever the circumstances.
Yaru (@yaru)
20th March 2025, 12:16
The whole point of racing from the team perspective is to finish as high as possible. If both drivers are already the top 2, there is no extra benefit to the team.
Some more, the wet conditions at the start and end where a few already crashed made things tricky as it was, it would be stupid to allow the drivers to go all out. In fact, if Norris didn’t save from his slip and continued on to win McLaren’s weekend would have been a lot worse due to Piastri not being able to save from his slip. I would say, they didn’t use the hold command enough last race, not that they used it too much.
Doggy
20th March 2025, 12:29
Had RBR done this, then everyone would be losing their minds.
Having said that, McLaren is quickly learning that if they want a world champion, things like this needs to be done.
Davethechicken
20th March 2025, 13:13
Red Bull announced their team orders for this season last year. Lawson is there to support not lead.
You really equate lapping back markers in the rain and suspending team battles for a couple of laps to Red Bulls policy?
Charles
20th March 2025, 13:16
Holding up the quickest (race) driver won’t necessarily give you a world champion; moreover, it will disrupt this driver’s rhythm. Red Bull never told their fastest driver to hold position and that driver was never in a situation that a team mate (in similar car conditions) was catching him. I did not like the teamorder, do I understand it, yes, at the same time you can confirm Norris was not the fastest and will not be the fastest WC if this continues.
Davethechicken
20th March 2025, 13:22
Spa 2024?
grat
20th March 2025, 13:16
Absolutely. Suggesting that the cars not be too aggressive in wet conditions passing backmarkers of unknown intent and capability is absolute lunacy, and McLaren should be thrown out of the Constructor’s championship.
They’re obviously trying to fix the outcome of the race.
Femke
20th March 2025, 16:39
Not in f1. Its more like enduramce racing these days, everything is budgetted. So you need to drive strategic instead of fast
Coventry Climax
20th March 2025, 17:34
Ah yes, that’s why I like the old F1 much better:
Strategy has always been part of it, but there’s two things I’m not really a fan of these days: The extent of it and the fact it is a whole team of what, 100 + people?, all using computers (and, before too long, AI probably) that determine the strategy instead of it being mostly on the driver.
And I’d be OK with a budget, if the teams got to decide freely on on what to spend it.
Adam (@rocketpanda)
20th March 2025, 11:49
I don’t particularly agree with using a ‘hold position’ team order on the first race.
Yaru (@yaru)
20th March 2025, 12:05
Considering they both slipped later in the race due to the conditions (which ruined Piastri’s race), they were too agressive by not using the hold call more in that race.
JC
20th March 2025, 12:21
This is precisely my thinking. Were they not pushing each other so fiercely when the rain that had been predicted finally hit, they likely would have finished 1-2.
Coventry Climax
20th March 2025, 15:34
Sorry to say, but that’s a hypothesis, not a conclusion.
They ran off because they both made a mistake. Nothing more, nothing less.
Were they pushing one another? I should certainly hope so!
As that too is the point of racing; pushing one another into making a mistake vs withstanding that pressure.
And that’s whatever the weather circumstances.
I don’t like it one bit, although I clearly understand why a team would issue them. Team orders nullify racing. And racing is the essence of the whole thing, including ‘the show’. Period.
An Sionnach
20th March 2025, 12:08
Let’s see. The conditions were particularly hazardous due to the track surface and those painted lines, but the wet seems to be one of the few places where Oscar has the edge. It can’t effectively be the case that they’re free to race, unless Oscar is faster. The team is important, but Oscar must be able to make a championship challenge now we are starting a new season.
Yes (@come-on-kubica)
20th March 2025, 12:18
Piastri bottled it which is exactly why Mclaren said that. What’s the point in risking?
Doggy
20th March 2025, 12:33
How on God’s green earth Piastri Bottled this?.
If you are referring to his off track excursion it happened way after team orders. Which BTW lando had went off track too.
dutchtreat (@dutchtreat)
20th March 2025, 12:37
What about the spectators out there in the rain, and the TV viewers all over the world. They don’t care about team, sponsor nonsense they want to see guys battle it out. It is a spectator sport not a snooze sport.
Davethechicken
20th March 2025, 13:16
McLaren is a refreshingly positive with their allowance of team battles compared to the last 4 years where there was no question whatsoever that Perez was there only to assist.
Just look at Spa last year where SP was sacrificed from running at what would have been P3 to let Max past.
grat
20th March 2025, 13:18
You know the order to hold position only last 3-4 laps, right?
Coventry Climax
20th March 2025, 15:40
Irrelevant. Even if it had lasted just 1 second, the timing of it is important. And that clearly favored one driver over the other.
That’s not “They’re free to race”.
Teamradio saying: If you guys bin it, you both get spanked, but go race. That’s being free to race.
Leo B
20th March 2025, 23:02
Team orders in the first race is bordering on paranoia. Stella should perhaps leave pit wall operations to cooler heads and maybe lie down with some calming music. More of this kind of thing will leave Piastri frustrated and he will not give his best.
Jorge Jaime
21st March 2025, 0:30
They’re paid employees so they follow orders or quit
Franky
21st March 2025, 1:59
The best team using team orders, or let’s say team policy to have a world champion is undoubtedly Red Bull. If McLaren had done something similar last year,. Lando would have been world champion. So the sooner the better to establish a no 1 favoured driver and use the 2nd driver as a test mule and strategic wildcard. Red Bull’s strategy is super successful no nonsense and no bs of racing team mates. Period.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
21st March 2025, 4:03
I don’t agree at all. They could have picked up a few points in obvious places like the Hungaroring and Monza but no way neat enough for Norris to win the title.
Franky
21st March 2025, 13:26
Ok maybe it is a bit of a stretch but given the high level of the competition and how narrow the margins become over the year, it is more effective to have a clear policy as red bull than have to split the team efforts between two competitive drivers. You can do it “subtly” as Mercedes did with Hamilton (particularly with Bottas) or without any embarrassment as red bull/Verstappen or ferrari/Schumacher. But you can see the pattern clearly. Another stretch but I see clearly that those teams were working 1.1-2.0 team effort for number 1 (including the second driver sacrificing strategy or plainly becoming part of the first driver strategy), and the rest of the effort for number 2 driver with less updates or even driving a kind of parts bin car due to budget restrictions, reserving money for the no. 1 driver. If you fail to recognise that then you are looking away.