McLaren savaged by the international media after Monza team orders

Monza was “another monumental stuff-up by McLaren”, a “clanger” and Lando Norris has been told he should “send a cheque with plenty of noughts” to Andrea Stella if he goes on to beat Oscar Piastri to this year’s World title.

And no, that’s not all coming from the Australian media, with the British press also unimpressed with McLaren’s use of team orders at the Italian Grand Prix.

The Australian press cries favouritism

Under the headline “‘Shameful’: F1 world convinced ugly Piastri conspiracy theory is true”, the Daily Telegraph called Sunday’s events “the smoking gun Oscar Piastri’s legion of fans have been waiting for after months of speculation about favouritism inside the McLaren garage.”

“The move,” added the Australian newspaper, “has definitely got tongues wagging. It has also poured a considerable amount of fuel on the burning suggestions Norris receives special treatment at Piastri’s expense.”

The Herald Sun labelled it “another monumental stuff-up by his [Piastri’s] McLaren team that has sent Australian Formula One fans into meltdown.”

Although Piastri “didn’t do any harm to his title hopes by his act of sportsmanship” as he still leads by 31 points, “McLaren’s team orders set off a firestorm on social media with Piastri’s supporters accusing the British team of favouring Norris, who was booed by part of the crowd when he was called onto the podium.”

But the British media hit even harder

The Australian press was quite tame compared to the British media’s take on the team orders.

The Telegraph claimed McLaren “dropped a clanger” and that “Piastri should have disobeyed instructions”.

“McLaren desire total and absolute fairness, yet that is not within their gift,” it continued. “Motorsport is far too subject to fortune – such as Norris’s mechanical retirement from the previous race in Zandvoort – that no team should be trying to manufacture 100 per cent fairness.

“It is impossible, even ludicrous. It benefits the team to keep the relationship between the drivers harmonious, of course, but that cannot be kept indefinitely or balanced perfectly.

It concluded: “The ultimate conclusion of McLaren’s pit-wall decision at Monza could be more tension and division in the team, not less.”

The Mirror also called out McLaren’s need for “control”, but that “in motorsport, as in life, the best-laid plans of race strategists and drivers often go awry. Luck, fate or whatever you want to call it intervenes. S*** happens.

“Fate decided on Sunday afternoon that Lando Norris was not going to finish the Italian Grand Prix ahead of Oscar Piastri.”

McLaren intervened in the same of fairness, but “where is the line drawn when it comes to ‘fairness’, as far as McLaren are concerned?

“Was it unfair that Norris suffered that engine blowout at Zandvoort? Perhaps they need to send Piastri out at Baku in two weeks’ time with a faulty power unit to balance the scales.

“Of course, that’s ridiculous – as ridiculous as the decision to meddle with the outcome of Sunday’s race at Monza.”

It was, however, the Daily Mail who landed the most brutal blow. “If Lando Norris goes on to clinch his first world title this year, he should send a cheque with plenty of noughts to Mr Andrea Stella, c/o McLaren, Woking.

“That is because his team principal’s even-handed decision-making, bordering on saintliness, allowed Norris to finish runner-up at the Italian Grand Prix, a crucial place ahead of Oscar Piastri.”

Key talking points following the 2025 Italian Grand Prix

? McLaren threw ‘papaya rules’ to the wind in Italian Grand Prix team orders call

? David Coulthard delivers ‘manipulated’ verdict after McLaren’s Monza team orders

German and Austrian media had questions and opinions

The Austrian and German press said much the same, with Kleine Zeitung asking the question: “McLaren caused a stir with a stable order shortly before the end. Was the change of position justified?

“Once again,” it continued, “McLaren managed to dominate the headlines of Formula 1. Not with the next victory in an incredibly dominant season so far, but rather with another controversial decision. The ‘Papaya’ world could be an ideal one if it hadn’t been for a hotly debated stable order at the end of the race.

“A stir, especially on social media: Many attested to the British racing team’s preference for Norris, especially after the elimination at the Dutch Grand Prix due to a technical defect.”

Auto Motor und Sport labelled it the “conversation par excellence after the race” as “McLaren once again handled the so-called papaya rules. Rules of the game that have been set up for both drivers in dealing with each other.

“At McLaren, there was a lot of discussion about the seat swap and the stable order between Oscar Piastri and Lando Norris. Everyone has a different opinion on this.”

The Italian media sat on the fence

However, the Italian media, perhaps more disturbed by Ferrari’s failure to reach the podium at their home race, sat on the fence.

Corriere dello Sport, giving Piastri a seven in its ratings, applauded his “accountant mode, similar to Alain Prost or Niki Lauda” before clarifying that the “first candidate to take Verstappen’s crown ran a sensible race” accepted the “team’s order to cede the position to Norris” because, the editor noted, “the Englishman had done it last year in Hungary, allowing the Australian to take the first success of his career.”

Gazzetta dello Sport also made sure everyone knew the “fact” that McLaren, “usually impeccable and setting an example for everyone on the grid”, had made the mistake that cost Norris second place.

“Perhaps mindful of the team orders imposed in Hungary in 2024, the pit wall asked the Australian to let his teammate pass so that they could then fight for second place. This is what happened, but there was no battle and Norris finished on the second step of the podium, a full 20 seconds behind Verstappen.”

Read next: Max Verstappen’s telling response to McLaren’s Italian GP team orders