- News

Live blog: Nibali puts winning Milan-San Remo ride on Strava, ‘driverless’ Tesla car rammed by ‘riderless’ dockless hire bike + more

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.
10 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
"attributed by experts", yeah sure, ok! Citing 8 year out of date per capita figures shows the weakness of your argument. Here's a couple of reasons I believe that the Netherlands fatality rate might be higher than the UK (independent of the crappy Dutch infrastructure), none of which you and Chrisonatrike suggested or mentioned: 1) not enough people wearing helmets in Netherlands. All sane people know that wearing a cycling helmet can potentially save lives, yet the Dutch seem to think themselves too special to wear one. Despite the fact the Netherlands has a superior privatised health system compared to our rotten, inefficient NHS, post-crash options are limited for people with severe head trauma which will inevitable lead to increased fatalities in the Netherlands. 2) Risk compensation by drivers and cyclists. Cyclists are lulled into a false sense of security thinking that segregated cycle lanes are their special infrastructure which insulate them from accidents. They don't. Then, car drivers take more risks due to increased congestion caused by the same cycling infrastructure, leading to a double-whammy of risky behaviour. 3) Cultural issues. People in the UK are renowned for their stiff upper lip, stoic, courteous behaviour. They naturally protect more vulnerable road users. I, myself, had a magnificent cycling experience earlier today on the local country lanes, waving and saying hello to the locals and cyclists alike. There really isn't a place like the UK (well, outside London anyway) that matches our hospitality and camaraderie. P.s. I'm not sure who Nigel is, I assumed you meant Nigel Farage but I can assure you I'm not him and that he has more pressing things to do than write responses on a cycling website. I hope that's helped your understanding a little, and enabled you to think a little independently rather than just suck in information that self-described "experts" want you to believe. Oh and Norway et Al are terrible comparators as hardly anyone lives there (and who'd want to to be honest? Lol!)
Yup. The UK has latterly tried add the safety back in after it was lost for vulnerable road users. (And after giving all the direct routes / valuable space over to motoring). But it's offering a modicum more safety in return for them losing a lot more convenience - so that has been reducing the "problem" also! Plus we lean heavily on "but people can be trusted to be reasonable" and "for any misbehaviour police it better". Unfortunately those are not good assumptions or choices for safety in a motornormative environment. (And road policing isn't a priority anyway). NL isn't the only place in Europe they've realised that mass motoring the old way is unsustainable (for lots of reasons). They're just the furthest on. In NL they still have some challenges because the (larger - thanks US!) car strikes back, and there are some questions about the impact of e-things. But they're *still* investing in improvements, and proportionally significantly more than the UK, even though they're already far ahead...
The Stockton Hub which I used occasionally (I don't live in Stockton) was open only during standard office hours, Mondays to Fridays, rendering it useless for families and leisure cyclists. It's a standard problem for a lot of government-funded or charity-run public services which close when many people most need them, presumably because staffing costs would rise substantially. The article also mentions cycle hubs in Redcar and Darlington which, so far as I can tell, have never existed.
Ho ho ho! No, we need to stop these idiotic cyclists completely (or limit them to velodromes, parks and maybe "rail trails") - that way there won't be any cyclist road fatalities! Simples! Meanwhile in many parts ofEurope they're finding the benefits of making it such that lots of people don't use cars for every journey - by fixing it so it's convenient and increasingly safe - despite much larger numbers of people getting around outside of cars than in the UK...
The fatality rate in the UK has fallen five years in a row during a period, starting with the Covid years, in which building of "idiotic Dutch roundabouts and segregated cycling infrastructure" has massively increased, so in fact using your own benchmark the statistics clearly show the benefits of increased cycling infrastructure. Not quite the gotcha you seem to think when viewed through non-troll lenses, Nige. The stupidity of your "argument" is further clearly illustrated by the fact that the list-topping Norway, Sweden and Denmark all have massive segregated cycling networks. The Dutch model used to demonstrate clearly the safer nature of the Dutch system, e.g. in 2018 the Netherlands had 8 fatalities per billion kms ridden compared to 21 in the UK; the primary reason for the increased fatality rates in the Netherlands has been attributed by experts to the massive uptake in ebikes (47% of new bikes sold in NL are now ebikes compared to 10% in the UK), particularly amongst the older population, nothing to do with the infrastructure.
It used to be great price this, but they played the ace marketing card and got the popularity and now...
Many thanks for posting these statistics and showing the downward trend in fatalities. One thing that stood out for me when clicking through to the government statistics page is the UK's exemplary record on this Vs other European countries, especially the much-vaunted record of The Netherlands, which actually shows twice as many fatalities as the UK per million of the population. The question that arises is therefore: why are the greens and other left-wing parties so keen to adopt an inferior and more dangerous road system when ours is obviously working well? It smacks of a need to regulate people's lives and curtail freedom. We need to stop these idiotic Dutch roundabouts and segregated cycling infrastructure, and get people sharing the road in a fair and equal manner, when the statistics show it's safer to do so. (Chart shows road fatalities per million population)
That's where the convertible aspect comes in. I've got a gravel bike but the canal I sometimes commute on has roots under the tarmac and barriers. The mtb with 'drops' is more comfortable for this and fits through the barriers. If I want to do something more technical I can put the flat bars on.
@FionaJJ These officers deployed next-level stupidity, and it must be difficult for the police to find people this dim. It doesn't even need rolling-roads or whatever, just a reputable bike computer on a quickly changed mount for the difficult cases where a proper EAPC has been modded, although you would need to look hard in Lancashire to find a police officer who knows how to make a pedal cycle go. Most illegal electric motorbikes are immediately obvious, not least because the crim is wearing a face mask. I saw an obvious one tonight coming out of Garstang Sainsbury's, not pedalling but without a face mask because everybody knows that the police only come into the town to hide away in the police station 200 yards away.
Gustav Gullholm.. that's not a good look mate
10 thoughts on “Live blog: Nibali puts winning Milan-San Remo ride on Strava, ‘driverless’ Tesla car rammed by ‘riderless’ dockless hire bike + more”
That Abingdon cyclist could
That Abingdon cyclist could probably have run someone down while drink driving, and been fined less…
brooksby wrote:
Ah, but we all know cyclists are so dangerous. I mean Lord Lawson said cycle lanes have caused more harm to London than the Blitz in WWII.
Why couldn’t the person in Abingdon not drive a car instead? Preferably a realy big one.
🙂
He should have just driven
He should have just driven his 4×4 on to the pavement and killed a child. It would have been cheaper.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/delivery-driver-who-mounted-pavement-12782437.amp
But it isn’t illegal to cycle
But it isn’t illegal to cycle on the pavement, unless he was furious… He is now.
I don’t think we should
I don’t think we should comment until we know the condition of the victim…
alansmurphy wrote:
A$6,000.
Given my extensive knowledge of chauffeur-driven Teslas, my guess is it had a mildly offended front bumper. I reckon that would cost about A$6,000 to coddle back to happiness.
There’s obviously more to the
There’s obviously more to the bike on pavement story then we are being told. Someone isn’t going to end up in court just for that……..
Bungle73 wrote:
You are jumping to conclusions. People have been fined large amounts just for simply cycling on a pavement, it does happen.
> “The total cost of the
> “The total cost of the damage to the vehicle was $6000.”
Bullshit. The total cost of the damage was more like $600, not $6000, unless you’re an utter muppet who enjoys being ripped off.
Driverless bike 1 : 0
Driverless bike 1 : 0 Driverless car