“The UCI hates innovation”: Cycling fans brand Jan-Willem van Schip’s latest disqualification a “petty personal grudge” over rule applied “incredibly inconsistently”; Google shows “shocking” handlebar set up in new Fitbit promotion + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Jan-Willem van Schip disqualified for “unconventional aerodynamic riding position”
Jan-Willem van Schip has been disqualified again, for the second time in less than a year, over his “unconventional aerodynamic riding position and bike setup.”
The disqualification, which teammates and staff called “pure harassment”, came just before the start of stage two of the Tour of Hellas in Greece.
On Instagram, van Schip described it as “very sad news”, adding that:“When I say that everyone does this and that I’m actually always holding my shifter, then… no.
“This really hurts. This is not okay. The bike is completely legal, the seatpost is fine — but they’ve found something to screw me over again. It hurts.”
View this post on Instagram
Many people on X suggested the disqualification amounted to the targeting of van Schip.
User Yungkarp wrote: “The UCI has decided year after year that they want to make an example of Jan-Willem for even thinking about how to optimise drop bar aerodynamics. At this point, it’s a petty personal grudge that is extremely unbecoming of such a large regulatory body.”
YouTuber Benji Naesen added that the rule is applied “incredibly inconsistently”, and encouraged the UCI to improve its decision-making around the regulation.
I can keep going… pic.twitter.com/yelO4C6a3h
— Benji Naesen (@BenjiNaesen) May 7, 2026
On Reddit, user Urbanwhiteboard agreed: “He got DQ’ed for puppy paws. There literally isn’t a breakaway without puppy paws. UCI should not do this type of selective judgment… they hate van Schip as they hated Obree.
“They hate innovation. You can dislike the position, but you cannot dislike Jan-Willem, such a class guy.”
However, others were less sympathetic. On Instagram, Derek Vail wrote: “The rules are pretty straightforward. You’re not allowed to rest your forearms, and this handlebar design clearly gives you an aero advantage. You can’t say the UCI is targeting him when he’s the only one with these handlebars.
“Trust me, if anyone else could get away with it, they would use them too.
Rauno added that: “I think it’s quite obvious that the position on the bike for one of these riders is very different from the rest. The handlebar setup for Jan seems way more sketchy…”
However, Naesen pointed out that: “He was not penalised for his handlebar set-up. So that’s not relevant. He was penalised for using his underarms as a point of support.”
When he was disqualified the first time, van Schip described himself as an “outcast who does things another way”, after being removed following an intervention from the UCI at last year’s Tour of Holland.
He added that: “Being rejected for chasing your dreams hurts.
“Being the outcast who does things another way causes a tonne of unnecessary friction. When things go wrong, you have to be fallible. I’ll have to be even better prepared next time.
“It’s amazing to be curious. Curious about getting faster, using less energy, and trying new things. Curious about winning. It’s incredible how much support I get on my journey. I’m truly grateful for that.
“So many people have cheered ‘Go Willem!’ on rainy Thursdays. I keep feeling people care about me and want things to go well. That moves me.”
“All day I was fighting”: Anna van der Breggen wins stage 6 of the Vuelta Femenina
It just kept going and going 😮💨
Anna van der Breggen powered her way to victory on Les Praeres de Nava to take control of La Vuelta Femenina ahead of the fearsome and decisive Alto de l’Angliru tomorrow 👀 pic.twitter.com/3rYtlracKu
— Cycling on TNT Sports (@cyclingontnt) May 8, 2026
Anna van der Breggen has won stage 6 of the Vuelta Femenina after powering to victory on the brutal slopes of Les Praeres to take control of the race overall.
The SD Worx-Protime rider attacked on gradients of up to 27% during the savage Asturian summit finish, dropping her rivals one by one in torrential rain and hail.
After a tentative start to the GC battle, the race finally exploded on the final climb. Cédrine Kerbaol was first to go on the attack at the base, but Van der Breggen soon took over, setting a crushing tempo that shattered the favourites group.
Paula Blasi briefly clung to her wheel before cracking with around 2.5km to go, leaving the Dutchwoman to ride clear alone through the fog to both the stage win and the red jersey.
Blasi finished second, while Marion Bunel rounded out the podium. With one mountain stage remaining on the Angliru, Van der Breggen now holds the upper hand in the fight for the overall title.
She said: “All day I was fighting and a climb like this, I think I never saw before so it was a hard climb.
“The girls took care of me all day. I wasn’t feeling so good at the beginning of the race because I could still feel the crash from yesterday and I had a muscle that was painful but it was getting better and better. Finishing like this, I’m incredibly happy.
It was special. It started steep and it finished steep. I tried to get a good pace but at one point, it was hard and you need to pace it well.
“It’s not that long, tomorrow is way longer so I tried to do well and luckily, it was enough.”
Paul Magnier sprints to first stage win of Giro d’Italia after dramatic crash in final kilometre
View this post on Instagram
Paul Magnier from Soudal-QuickStep sprinted to victory on the opening stage of the Giro d’Italia, pulling on the pink jersey and claiming the first Grand Tour stage win of his career after a dramatic finale in Burgas, Bulgaria.
The 22-year-old Frenchman emerged from a reduced group after a major crash inside the final kilometre wiped out most of the peloton and left only a handful of riders able to contest the sprint.
Magnier timed his effort perfectly, using teammates Jasper Stuyven and Dries Van Gestel to stay near the front before jumping onto the wheel of Tobias Lund Andresen from Decathlon CMA CGM and powering past him in the final metres to win by a wheel.
Ethan Vernon from NSN Pro Cycling completed the podium in third.
Dylan Groenewegen (Unibet Rose Rockets) and Kaden Groves (Alpecin-Premier Tech) were among the riders caught up in the incident and unable to sprint, with Groenewegen appearing to injure his wrist.
The 147km stage from Nessebar to Burgas had been largely uneventful before chaos erupted on the narrow finishing straight, where a touch of wheels sent riders sliding into the barriers and blocked much of the bunch behind.
“It was really hectic in the final because everyone was still fresh after a quiet day,” Magnier said afterwards. “We knew positioning would be super important on the narrow roads, and my teammates did an amazing job to put me in the perfect place.”
The victory marks Magnier’s return to top form after a disappointing classics campaign earlier this spring. The Frenchman now leads the general classification by four seconds over Lund Andresen after taking the 10-second time bonus for the win.
Porsche shuts down e-bike motor brand Fazua as car brand’s e-bike subsidiary closed and 500 jobs cut
6,000 tonnes of clay used to repair local cycle route destroyed by storms
Around 6,000 tonnes of clay have been used to rebuild a damaged section of embankment bordering the Stover Canal near Kingsteignton in Devon.
The damage followed three major storms in 2024, 2025 and 2026, during which millions of tonnes of water poured into a disused quarry to help prevent flooding in Newton Abbot, Devon live reports.
The embankment beside the former Sibelco quarry at East Golds was first breached during severe flooding caused by Storm Bert in November 2024, before suffering further damage during Storm Bram in December 2025 and Storm Chandra earlier this year.
The storms destroyed a 40-metre section of the embankment, flooding the quarry and forcing the closure of part of the Stover Canal trail path and the shared walking and cycling route between Newton Abbot and Exeter Road.
Sibelco has now begun repairs to the embankment in consultation with geotechnical specialists and local partners, including the Stover Canal Trust and Devon County Council.
The work involves around 6,000 tonnes of ball clay, along with limestone and a specialist membrane designed to strengthen the structure against future extreme weather events. Subject to favourable conditions, repairs are expected to be completed this summer, with the canal towpath and walking and cycling routes due to reopen by October.
Richard Giles, Kingsteignton Manager (Operations) for Sibelco, said: “We know how important the Stover Canal towpath is to the local community and we are pleased to have started work on this scheme to reinstate the embankment and allow the reopening of the route.
“This has been a complex process following a series of significant flooding events and we have worked closely with specialist engineers and our partners locally to develop a robust, long-term solution. We look forward to the completion of the works and seeing the route reopened for local people to enjoy again.”
Paul Taper, chairman of the Stover Canal Trust, added: “We have been pleased to work with Sibelco and other partners following the storm damage and recognise the long-standing support Sibelco has provided to the trust and the canal over many years.
“The towpath is a much-loved local route, valued by walkers and residents, and we welcome the work now under way to repair the embankment and reopen access for the community.”
‘Hordes of reckless cyclists’ in Mallorca are speeding in middle of the road, blocking buses, and causing crashes, coach drivers’ union claims
“It’s impossible to work with this stress every day. Some of my colleagues are going crazy,” one driver said, amid calls for tighter regulations which could see cyclists banned at certain times on popular roads like the famous Sa Calobra climb
> ‘Hordes of reckless cyclists’ in Mallorca are speeding in middle of the road, blocking buses, and causing crashes, coach drivers’ union claims
Not even third time lucky...
“Don’t worry, you’ll have many opportunities in life.”
Me:#GirodItalia pic.twitter.com/rOOSp89BVV
— Mihai Simion (@faustocoppi60) May 8, 2026
E-bike injuries are lower even though trips are up — plus Specialized drops e-MTB prices, Estarli’s new fleet packages + more
“Every child needs to have good conditions at home”: nail polish for children’s charity at the Giro
🇮🇹 #GirodItalia
Raising awareness. ❤️🇩🇰 pic.twitter.com/6cYGVf4Smc
— Team Visma | Lease a Bike (@vismaleaseabike) May 8, 2026
“Those glasses alone deserve disqualification”: more reactions to Jan-Willem van Schip’s latest disqualification
View this post on Instagram
It seems that unconventional (or, in Google’s case, wrong) handlebars continue to be a topic of discussion on today’s live blog.
The UCI’s decision to ban Jan-Willem van Schip has continued to be discussed by fans. However, the debate of his elbow position and weight on his forearms has moved on to more superficial debates.
Namely, his unconventional green glasses. Jaylocycling said that “those glasses alone deserve disqualification”.
Clementino has added that: “children’s helmet + non-compliant sunglasses. enough for ‘la brigade du style’ to preventing him to race. I wish cops would also take care of that on open roads, not only UCI during official races.”
Nello Breton clarifies that “I think they key here is you can be a mould-breaking innovator or you can be popular with authorities, you can’t be both.”
Has the Giro d'Italia lost its spark?
“Don’t get me wrong, I love the Giro. I’m just not very excited about it”
Google shows “shocking” handlebar set up in new Fitbit Air promotion
The new Google Fitbit Air is supposed to help users “focus on what counts”, but cyclists online have found themselves focused on something else entirely: the bizarre handlebar position in the promotional images.
Bike brand Vielo got in touch with us to let us know that the image chosen by Google to promote the Fitbit Air features a bike with a very low tilt on the bars.
On Reddit, some users questioned whether the image had been created with AI, with one asking: “Can these bars even rotate this low with the internal cable routing?”
Another pointed to the wonky bar tape and described the “supposed Garmin mount” as a “straight up hallucination”.
The screenless fitness tracker, unveiled this week as Google’s answer to minimalist wearables like Whoop, is being marketed around comfort, simplicity and distraction-free health tracking.
Others took a more tongue-in-cheek approach to the image.
One user joked: “Aero bars actually set to landing position here. This is how you slow down after KOMing.”
Another added: “DRS not engaged until it is his turn on the front.”
The jokes soon descended into innuendo. Reddit user AUBeastmaster wrote: “I think they have a medicine for that if your handlebar stays like that.”
Continuing the gag, euph_22 replied: “Or maybe adjust the angle of your saddle. Having the nose point up can put pressure in a bad place and can lead to issues.”
Whether the image convinces any cyclists to try the new product, however, remains to be seen.
Happy 100th birthday Sir David Attemborough!
Happy 100th birthday David Attenborough, who is reported to have never passed his driving test and prefers to cycle.
Though that didn’t stop him from encouraging a boy to stage an anti-cycle-lane protest against plans to “sacrifice 26 irreplaceable trees” in 2024.
Safe to say he has probably stopped cycling now…
“If I can bicycle, I bicycle.”
Sir David Attenborough.Happy 100th birthday to a legend.
He has never passed a driving test and doesn’t own a car.
— Carlton Reid (@carltonreid.com) 8 May 2026 at 08:34
“People will come up to me and say: ‘Yeah, f*** cycling!’ No, that’s not the message!” Comedian Kathy Maniura on creating ‘The Cycling Man’, your local bike lane’s worst nightmare
The worlds of cycling and comedy collide this week on the road.cc Podcast, where we discuss a new critically acclaimed character who is emotionally repressed, not very self-aware, and loves his bike. Sound familiar?
“Careless cycling” or “unsafe driving”?
Apparently this was “careless cycling” according to plod, and I got a letter through the post. It beggars belief sometimes. 🤷♂️ pic.twitter.com/xX64YAJ3Yv
— Chapona Bike (@ChaponaBike123) May 7, 2026
Chapona Bike has reported that the Surrey Police have deemed a video of a cyclist standing facing an oncoming car to amount to “careless cycling”.
He defended his actions, saying: “If you can’t see where you’re going, then don’t attempt the manoeuvre. Road safety 101.”
However, the response prompted criticism on X.
Alan Pascoe wrote: “It is. The driver in the white car made an error of judgment, but instead of making an allowance for them, you stubbornly blocked the road.”
Jules Cranfield added: “He didn’t have priority. The car was already passing the parked car when he approached.
“The car already manoeuvring past a blockage has priority, irrespective of which side of the road they — and you — are on. That’s basic Highway Code.”
And, inevitably, the subject of “road tax” was raised. Dai Groggy said: “Cyclists think they own the road. You cause obstruction and slow traffic down when you don’t need to. Self-entitlement without paying any road tax.”
Foobar Saunders added: “When cycling, this kind of thing really winds me up but, in this instance, I’m afraid you’re both at fault. The driver is rude and incompetent for not giving way when you had priority. However, once committed to the overtake, you’re obliged to let them through — and you didn’t.”
In response, Chapona Bike said: “…and how exactly could I have ‘let them through’? The best thing if this happens is to stop, take stock of the surroundings and then decide what to do. One option was for the driver to reverse — it’s not that difficult. But to mount the kerb in frustration and not even attempt to pass safely is not on.”
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
28 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@jackcycles I don't see any evidence in your comment that you're not a paid lobbyist posting anti-e-bike comments on behalf of the motor and oil industries. As far as the bike in the article goes, though, there is pretty strong evidence that it was road legal, in that it was hired from a reputable scheme.
Or just buy direct from Waltly & save a few quid!!
We regularly hear of a traffic police officer giving confident opinions in court cases regarding such things as 'speed at the time of collision', and their opinions seem to be taken seriously. We also know of a police officer's opinion, when being told by a dying man that he has been stabbed, saying 'I don't think you have, mate'. Why are people still surprised that stupid, ill-educated but very self-confident police officers are as thick as two short planks, as well as being criminal (think Couzens, Carrick and many of the officers at Charing Cross Police Station) and/ or as bent as a £9 note- this method of assessing whether a bike is a legal EAPC is so stupid as to beyond belief, unless you have personal experience of the UK police, that is. Many of them really are malevolent, cyclist-hostile thick, out-of-control b******s
@Rendel Harris my "lived experience" is of delivery drivers riding around on illegal modified motorbikes. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen anyone riding around with a silly blue delivery bag riding a road-legal bike, let alone having insurance. I don't see any evidence in the article to support the idea that the seized bike was unmodified and road legal. These e-motorbikes are a menace to the road. Just yesterday I went to my local bike shop and the poor owner nearly killed himself when some fat bloke riding what can only be described as a motorbike drove to the door asking for help with his brakes. Bike shop owner went to have a look and inadvertently turned a throttle, causing the machine to roar into life and drag him along the pavement in an undignified manner.
There wouldn't have been a peloton in that era (aside from Christophe Bassons) if they had instigated night-time testing.
The article states that: "The term E-bike refers to an electrically assisted pedal cycle (EAPC)" YES & NO. It can refer to any electrically powered cycle or motorbike. That would include EAPCs. An "E-bike" is not a legally defined thing.
It occurred to me that this could be fitted to an older rim brake bike as well but it would involve for example building a new rear wheel with a disc hub and rim brake rim.
@Paul J Please show me any reliable evidence. EPO tests already detect levels far below the minimum effective dose. With the recent state of the art, microdosing simply does not make any sense.
@tomlew microdosing EPO most definitely does "work" in terms of stimulating RBC production.
This is what the media frenzy about the "dangers of e-bikes" led us to. Meanwhile, drivers kill one pedestrian a day in general indifference.
28 thoughts on ““The UCI hates innovation”: Cycling fans brand Jan-Willem van Schip’s latest disqualification a “petty personal grudge” over rule applied “incredibly inconsistently”; Google shows “shocking” handlebar set up in new Fitbit promotion + more on the live blog”
Groundblog Day?
Very similar to my own incident, for which the driver recieved fine and points (£100 + 3 points, I assume).
Would be good to know which police force blamed Chapona.
Respectfully, I think your incident is rather different and much more worthy of submission and police action because the driver is overtaking you using the pavement on the wrong side of the road in the normal course of you using the road legitimately, you weren’t trying to be vexatious by blocking him.
and the driver then used threatening language.
Ah, one of those drivers who is so much of a hurry, they have to trample all over road law and driving safely, but have time to stop and give it what for
Sorry, that’s just a cyclist creating drama for the sake of it. If another vehicle is already committed to overtaking a parked car before you get there then you should cede priority to them. Yes, the driver of the white car could have waited and in terms of good manners probably should have, but they were indisputably in the channel and making the overtake before the cyclist arrived; all the cyclist had to do was slow slightly and let them through, there was absolutely no need to carry on riding straight up to them and block. Personally I would have slowed down and let them through, possibly with a sarcastic “after you!” if no thanks were forthcoming, or more likely having spotted the problem ahead I would’ve hopped on the pavement either side and the situation wouldn’t have arisen. Although I regularly submit bad driving videos to the police I certainly wouldn’t have bothered with this one and frankly if I did and the police told me not to play silly buggers by blocking the road over what was at worst a minor error of judgement from the car driver I would deserve it.
Whilst the cyclist certainly overreacted to what should have been a minor annoyance, it’s not just “manners” that the driver should have waited – it is set out in the Highway Code: “Give way to oncoming vehicles before passing parked vehicles or other obstructions on your side of the road” (Rule 163)
I know that’s what it says in the HC but what is not defined is how far away the oncoming vehicle has to be before you don’t have to give way, i.e. can you complete your manoeuvre before they arrive. As the cyclist in this instance was going extremely slowly, and apparently having a laugh with a passerby rather than focusing on the traffic ahead, the driver of the white car has at least an arguable case to say that they could have been round the parked car and back in their lane without impeding the cyclist if he hadn’t chosen to ride straight up to them. With a little compromise I would say that confrontation could have been completely avoided at little cost to the cyclist.
Whilst I generally agree with what you are saying, in this case the video does show that the car was unable to complete the pass before the cyclist arrived on the scene. The cyclist did not accelerate to force the issue, there just wasn’t sufficient time to clear the parked cars.
The driver made a poor choice, a choice based on the premise that the cyclist would yield to them. The cyclist did not… well technically they did as if they hadn’t they’d have ended on the cars bonnet. I digress.
Where the cyclist clearly messed up here, is having taken retribution once, by stopping and making a scene with the car driver, they doubled down and submitted the video for police scrutiny. Rightly so, they have been called up for their inflammatory actions.
If instead they’d made a song and dance of trying to stop in time, desperately saving themselves by diving into the kerb, and then submitted that video to the police, they’d have got further. However if they’d done that, there would be no scene, no escalated driver behavior to report anyway, so again got no where.
Sometimes, having a camera on your bike is your own worst enemy.
Slightly different view to Jimmy – I don’t think the driver assumed the cyclist would yield, I think they ‘just’ blindly followed the Peugeot in front without making their own assessment, as many do (to be clear, yes, this is bad) and weren’t aware of the cyclist until the Peugeot pulled back in, by which time they were committed. By then I reckon the best they could have done would be to stop on the wrong side of the road, leaving the cyclist a choice of which side to pass them on.
By the same token though, the cyclist seems to have proceeded towards the Peugeot assuming the road would be clear behind it.
Slightly annoying, shouldn’t happen, does happen, wouldn’t report it.
Not really as it’s entirely down to the cyclist as to how and when to submit footage.
Typically, there’s so many possible incidents to submit that most people start raising the bar on which ones are either serious or undeniable. e.g. If you catch a driver clearly using a mobile phone then the police (or at least A&S police) will almost always take action such as fining them. Close passes are very much subjective and I’ve even noticed that when I’ve had a close pass on a ride, the camera footage may not look particularly bad, so I usually only submit the ones that I think are indisputable.
Probably the best bit about running a camera is that you feel less need to remonstrate with the driver and also you can end up taking more care to not be caught out RLJing or similar.
Your optimism is endearing.
Agreed. If I was to do what this chap did I would be posting footage a dozen times a ride. Drivers are pricks and think they own the roads (oh the irony eh). I regularly have people drive at me when I am overtaking parked cars (on their side of the road), I constantly have what this cyclist had where cars simply assume they have right of way.
I reserve sending footage to the police for when someone has actually put my safety at risk through no contribution of my own. I won’t knowingly or willingly put myself in harms way to prove a point. Yes the driver is in the wrong but part of sharing the roads is compensating for the pricks and not making things worse.
The part that really unsettles me, is the response by the police is almost condoning the actions of the driver mounting the pavement to escape a minor inconvenience.
the response by the police is almost condoning the actions of the driver
What’s this ‘almost’? It’s what they do almost invariably! The police in the UK condone illegal actions by drivers all the time- from RLJs to ignoring vehicles without MOTs for months and years, even when they have failed MOT for serious safety defects. The police are biggest obstacle to cyclist safety in the UK because they encourage the type of driver behaviour with which we’re all familiar, as drivers learn that there are no consequences.
The view from Gloucestershire Constabulary. There is a mandatory cycle lane in Cheltenham which nearly always has parked cars on it. The cars also have two wheels on the narrow pavement which would prevent wheel chair users from passing. On one occasion there were three. I hung around a bit and filmed all three actually driving on the pavement and in the mandatory cycle lane as I know the police are powerless to act for simply parking in a cycle lane or a pavement.
This is the response I got for the first two.
” Your evidence has been reviewed, and we have decided that there is insufficient evidence for us to proceed with a prosecution.
The offence of Driving on a pavement is a non-endorsable offence in itself, and the vehicle has mounted the pavement carefully and slowly, not affecting any pedestrians or other road users.”
And the third. This was the driver straight in front of me in the still below. I waited as I wasn’t sure what the child would do if I tried to pass.
“Thank you for your submissions to OP SNAP.
Your evidence has been reviewed, and we have decided that there is insufficient evidence for us to proceed with a prosecution.
As per my previous email, the offence of Driving on a pavement is a non-endorsable offence in itself, not affecting any pedestrians or other road users. Parking in the cycle lane – at the time of your approach, you chose to stop although there was sufficient room for you to cycle past with no on-coming traffic.”
I reserve sending footage to the police for when someone has actually put my safety at risk through no contribution of my own…
There, you see! Condemned from your own mouth/ by your own keyboard/ hoist by your own petard etc.
You are the ultimate cause of any offence by wilfully being on the road on a bicycle which is a contribution and provocation, when the police have made unceasing efforts to discourage you. So do you have the proof of genuine action as a result of your considered reports, as opposed to: ‘we’re taking action but we’re not telling you what it was’ (which means the utterly worthless advice letter or the almost as worthless joke driving course)?
Here I am, again contributing by being on the road this morning
For some reason I can’t reply to Bungle-%2’s comment with quotes of police responses.
Which are ludicrous.
If a driver acts in a way that would be a straight fail in a driving test (which each of those examples clearly is) then the police should have the power (and willingness) to at least give points and a fine.
And now the video!- UpRide are pretty quick these days
And to complete the record of the recent Stagecoach mass attack:
ttps://upride.cc/incident/yx68uwz_stagecoach42_closepass/
ttps://upride.cc/incident/sk19evu_stagecoach42_closepass/
I had to go back to 2021 for 40 bus attack, because they are just an infrequent 41 variant
ttps://upride.cc/incident/px12dnu_stagecoach40bus_closepass/
Waiting to see if cycling socials have footage of the driver on the Hyde Park cycleway last night…
What happened?
I had a pair of green framed glasses similar to those pictured above.
I bought them in Italy so they are Ipso facto stylish.
I think you’ve got Italy and Ancient Rome mixed up there – understandable mistake.
Er, link on Mallorca story is not a link.
Bungle:
As per my previous email, the offence of Driving on a pavement is a non-endorsable offence in itself, not affecting any pedestrians or other road users. Parking in the cycle lane – at the time of your approach, you chose to stop although there was sufficient room for you to cycle past with no on-coming traffic.”
It wouldn’t have mattered if there had been a continuous stream of oncoming traffic, they would just have thought of some other reason to avoid taking action. I have said it before too often, but it is very difficult to fail to despise the police.
Yep, although “cock-up” / human priorities is more usually the main cause rather than malevolence, that looks less like “we’ve got more important things to police” or woeful ignorance * and more like “they’re in a car, so stop moaning and only come back if you’re dead and have a ton of witnesses”.
* Because driving and parking on the footway or in cycle infra could only possibly have an effect if the driver hit someone…
Another day of mass motoring, another poor passenger of a car forced to leave the driving seat and run for their life after their vehicle goes rogue and attacks vulnerable road users:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgrpgp91rwwo
If only cars didn’t have such vast benefits to society! Then there might be more pressure to ensure their use was managed to avoid some of the negatives while still retaining some of the useful features.
Of course nobody has ever worked out how that could be done…
COAB wrote “Of course nobody has ever worked out how that could be done…”
Someone has made a start though.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/may/08/cities-cars-experts-green-spaces-cyclists