Home

Old news I know, but reading up about the cancellation of the Vachery triathlon I couldn't help but notice the following quote in the 'Dorking and Leatherhead' advertiser:
"One of the event's most vocal opponents, Bill Bryce – landlord of The Old School House pub in Ockley – told the Advertiser: "I think it was the sheer arrogance of the organisers and the county council as to why there was so much opposition. Had they come and spoken to us and discussed the issues, we might have been a bit more flexible. As for the company closing down, I have little to no sympathy. This is a great thing for us."

So, business owner who complains about loss of trade for one day, feels quite happy to see another business shut down entirely.  41
Perhaps if Mr Bryce had a more flexible approach as he suggests, he could have seen it as an opportunity instead of which he considers ruining another business and putting the backs up of hundreds of athletes as a great result.

Unfortunately, I do not live in the area concerned, so cannot boycott Mr Bryce's pub. However, perhaps we could start a name and shame list of businesses which do not deserve our patronage? I am sure that readers can suggest quite a few in Surrey and the New Forest to begin with......  39

9 comments

Avatar
SteppenHerring [330 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

His pub is on the A29 (on G25/45 for testers). Could they have possibly closed that? I don't see how. I never go past anyway (aside from when on G45) because Weare Street is so much nicer.

If you're compiling a list, Mitchells of Horley seem to think that it's OK for their drivers to spit on cyclists.

Avatar
jollygoodvelo [1537 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I'm already boycotting Addison Lee and TfL buses.

Avatar
bobdelamare [19 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

The word is "hypocrisy" actually but you are wrong on both that and NIMBY.

The Olympic races shut off most of East Surrey for the whole day and people just accepted it as a one-off. Then the Prudential did the same, then something else with no warning or consultation with people on the routes. In other countries the Police shut the road for and hour or two as the race passes and then everything goes back to normal, not here. There aren't public transport services nor easy alternative routes to allow people to go about their lives. Local events co-ordinate their days to avoid clashes. Not these characters. Also people plan visits from friends and relatives who would have no idea of the road closures. The Vachary event was the fourth in a matter of weeks and that just was the last straw.

Now stop being so arrogant, consult and advise and we can all live on this overcrowded island in harmony.

Avatar
JeevesBath [180 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
bobdelamare wrote:

The word is "hypocrisy" actually but you are wrong on both that and NIMBY.

The Olympic races shut off most of East Surrey for the whole day and people just accepted it as a one-off. Then the Prudential did the same, then something else with no warning or consultation with people on the routes. In other countries the Police shut the road for and hour or two as the race passes and then everything goes back to normal, not here. There aren't public transport services nor easy alternative routes to allow people to go about their lives. Local events co-ordinate their days to avoid clashes. Not these characters. Also people plan visits from friends and relatives who would have no idea of the road closures. The Vachary event was the fourth in a matter of weeks and that just was the last straw.

Now stop being so arrogant, consult and advise and we can all live on this overcrowded island in harmony.

Dear Bob,
Thank you for your contribution and your not-so-subtle spelling correction (perhaps next time you are in the dictionary you could also look up ‘patronising’).

I do not believe that I am wrong in using the term NIMBY. The people protesting are doing so because of the impact on their own personal convenience/priorities (as ably demonstrated by the landlord quoted). If you were petitioning against an event in Wales, for example, where it had no personal impact then it would not classify as NIMBY.

I also do not believe that I was displaying any arrogance in my post. If you spent some time looking further afield on this site, then you might become aware of the extent of aggression that people on bicycles are subject to on a daily basis. I personally do not take part in sportives, so the cancellation of any such event does not directly concern me. However, I do not believe that businesses that openly display hostility towards cyclists should benefit from me financially and would encourage others to follow suit.

I suggest that if you do wish to engage with cyclists, you spend some time reading the other articles on the site. Your assertion that if we do as you say we will all live in harmony is quite frankly a ludicrous concept, when people will verbally or physically assault someone purely because of their choice of transport. I suspect that many residents protesting the events in Surrey have mentioned their ‘rights’. We also have rights to move around safely and without harassment, however too often these rights are ignored.

Avatar
Paul J [908 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Have to agree with Bob, having wide-ranging road closures in your local area is maybe tolerable for one or two big sporting events per year, but after that it would start to get a bit annoying - particularly if whole-day closures rather than rolling.

Avatar
bikebot [2149 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Nowt wrong with trying to understand why people are annoyed. If there is consultation, anyone who acts as an outright NIMBY would be fairly obvious.

Avatar
northstar [1108 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

nimby's alert.

Avatar
levermonkey [680 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I live inside the M25 and over the course of a year I'm probably affected by about six Closed Road Events either where I live or where I work.

If I'm not working I make sure that I get everything in that I'm going to need the day before. I then use the event as a great excuse to have a very, very relaxing day(If you know what I mean!).

If I'm working I check the event's website for the times of the road closures and plan my travel arrangements accordingly. If I have to get to work a couple of hours earlier than I need to, so be it. The signs detailing the event are put up well in advance so you can't exactly be surprised when the road gets closed.

As a side issue. People attending events tend to spend a awful lot of money. The Etape Caledonia for instance puts about £1 000 000 into the local economy over a weekend. And still they have a local lobbying group (ACRE Against Closed Road Events) complaining.

You can't please all of the people all of the time.

Avatar
JeevesBath [180 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Paul J wrote:

Have to agree with Bob, having wide-ranging road closures in your local area is maybe tolerable for one or two big sporting events per year, but after that it would start to get a bit annoying - particularly if whole-day closures rather than rolling.

That would seem fair, apart from the fact that this is far from an isolated incident. Challenge Henley has relocated based on the considerable negativity expressed by locals, and the ongoing situation in the New Forest which is effectively driving cycling events out of the region show a distinct pattern. The more certain areas become 'off limits' to events, the more pressure there will be on those areas that do welcome large scale rides. These areas will then themselves become untenable and it becomes impossible to hold any event because the hoops one has to jump through in order to get permission become so onerous, nobody bothers anymore.

If you don't take part in sportives, that may not concern you. However, in the wider context, we already have a situation where the law considers cyclists to be second class citizens. By giving credence to the view of cyclists as a nuisance, it simply means it is more acceptable for ‘normal’ people (ie non-cyclists) to openly show intolerance towards those on bikes because it is considered the social norm.

Personally, I do not wish to give my hard earned money to a business that considers me to be a nuisance one day, but would welcome me with open arms were I to turn up in a car the next. Nor would I wish to trade with a company that allowed it’s drivers to verbally abuse me while I am simply trying to get home on my bike. If I am alone in this, so be it.