Live blog: Pass-agg van stickers (we prefer ours); Richard Carapaz fails to secure visa for Tour of Britain; Telegraph takes firm position on whether cycle helmets should be mandatory; pass-agg van stickers + more
SUMMARY
Telegraph takes firm position on whether cycle helmets should be mandatory
“Think again”
If you chose no, well, think again.
It’s cool to cycle with the wind caressing your head – until you smash it. Here @baldersdale gives you a good reason to wear a helmet and #cyclesafehttps://t.co/wn0mXZmLsj
— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) September 5, 2019
Meanwhile in the Netherlands
A quote from a friend on bike helmet use:
“As someone living in Amsterdam: I would say helmets are very important in making cycling safer here. They allow us to identify the tourists and keep extra distance from them.”
— Car Helmets (@CarHelmets) September 5, 2019
Eurobike news in brief
This invention from Japan is called the One Point Five. The man we spoke to said, “The good thing is that it’s so difficult to ride you get the fun sensation of learning to ride a bike again.”
Funky bar tape colours from Guee.
The Asfalt LR e-bike won a Eurobike Start-Up award. The logo on the head tube is a functioning light.
A second battery is housed in the seat tube
Latest version of the Strida comes with disc brakes and belt drive.
And the award for the most eye-catching paint job goes to... Muc-Off
Muc-Off is at Eurobike this week with a pink leopard print Cervelo that fits with the packaging design of some of its new expanded tubeless range of products.
The British brand begins its 25 year anniversary celebrations in November.
Is today's final climb in the Vuelta the toughest in Grand Tours?
Simon Warren thinks so.
“My 34×27 was totally insufficient, I was bringing a balloon sword to a gun fight.”
Los Machucos. The hardest grand tour climb???https://t.co/m7Q7pfTdli
— Simon Warren (@100Climbs) September 6, 2019
Richard Carapaz fails to secure visa for Tour of Britain
Giro d’Italia winner Richard Carapaz, currently with Movistar but moving to Team Ineos next year, has failed to secure a visa for the Tour of Britain.
Sadly, and despite the Movistar Team following all procedures, @RichardCarapazM‘s visa for the @TourofBritain has not been granted in time for him to travel to the #OVOToB. @h_carretero will be replacing the Ecuadorian. Our race guide (starts Sat) https://t.co/AbMyERrNaS
— Movistar Team (@Movistar_Team) September 6, 2019
We’re interested to see how much of this sort of thing we see for the World Championships in a couple of weeks’ time…
Near Miss of the Day 302: Glancing blow but police won’t even speak to the driver
This near miss looks about as close as they come to us.
Suspended sentence for Sheffield taxi driver who drove at cyclist and "caused her to fall"
“She was very frank with the police, and this court, in saying she called you a psycho”
Carapaz or not, the Tour of Britain starts tomorrow
The @OVOEnergy Tour of Britain begins TOMORROW .#OVOToB pic.twitter.com/d6Qvw3fuM3
— Tour of Britain (@TourofBritain) September 6, 2019
Move over Boston Dynamics
This hellish contraption was spotted at Eurobike. Not sure we need to worry about robots taking over just yet but this thing is the stuff of nightmares
A new (to us) passive-aggressive van sign aimed at cyclists
A new rear van sign to me.
I hope https://t.co/ns1bLcfDuq employs drivers who also are versed in the HWC ! pic.twitter.com/9kpzfLZXuL— cycleoptic (@cycleoptic) September 4, 2019
I want to answer this question but how? Should I etch it underneath with a simple yes or no using a chisel and hammer? Or would paint based replies be more appropriate?
— Señor Chris (@AD828321) September 5, 2019
£1.1m to improve urban ends of Scarborough-to-Whitby Cinder Track
Planned work significantly different from planned £7m overhaul that drew backlash in 2017.
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.
42 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
As Mary Whitehouse never said - one doesn't have to read the article if one doesn't want to read about an off-road bicycle.
@FionaJJ In London they're allowed to stop on single and double yellows to deliver packages or empty pillar boxes; in practice they take this as carte blanche to park wherever and whenever they want, such as this chap on the Brixton Road who pulled into the bus/cycle/motorcycle lane without indicating, as I approached at 20mph, to park on a red route, response to a remonstrance, "I suppose you never get post delivered do ya?"
@Rendel Harris We have a pavement parking ban, but around here at least, royal mail vans are already exempt, subject to certain caveats, such as allowing at least 1.5m, and only being stopped to do their work.
It was already embarrassing for the police that they made such a mess of their attempt to determine whether a bike was legal or not, but I had assumed it was a group of well intentioned, but under-trained officers acting on their own initiative, having spotted something they thought looked not quite right. I'm now discovering this was a planned activity, something sufficiently organised to have been given a name - Operation FRISLEN, designed specifically to identify and remove illegal e-bikes and scooters. It's apparent that the officers were sent out without adequate training, never mind the kind of equipment that should be used for this sort of work. I'm not saying they always need specialist equipment to spot all illegal bikes, but at least if they'd been given a demonstration with that equipment, they'd have realised why their approach was not going to end well.
Have put drop bars on a 2001 B1 mtb, a 2007 stumpy hardtail and a 2010 stumpy full suss. In all cases fairly basic conversións leaving gearing and wheels broadly the same and concentrating on correct positioning of bars and fit. Oddly, with all 3 I was happy with the result when recently done, but after a few months found that the extra speed on easy trails was more than offset by the lack of ability (probably mine) on tougher routes and finally preferred flat bar with slammed and inverted stem as best overall compromise. Good fun playing around, though.
The photos in this review look they are for a different bag?
This is a strange reactionary knee jerk overall. But what is this "are essentially motorbikes in disguise" waffle? "One letter claimed that high-powered electric ‘e-bikes’ were “essentially motorbikes” in disguise, with many being used without lights, helmets, or any hi-vis clothing." Surely, they simply ARE motorbikes?
I only watched the last one, that's enough for me! A punishment pass and a clueless passenger. Did you op snap that one?
I don't love the motorway comment. What if they're miles from a motorway? The get in the cycle lane comment is born out of ignorance from people who never cycle. I would just tell them the reason: It's full of broken glass, wet leaves, etc. I'm turning right. I'd have to keep stopping and then rejoining the road. I'd have to keep giving way. It's full of pedestrians. Etc. Or simply ask if they have tried it and leave it at that.
@Chris RideFar In any of the offered options (Amazon, Apple or Spotify) there are transcript buttons that will give you a transcript if you wish. I think as road.cc has a limited staff and budget and most people enjoy it free, asking them to provide everything just the way we want it is perhaps a bit much?
42 thoughts on “Live blog: Pass-agg van stickers (we prefer ours); Richard Carapaz fails to secure visa for Tour of Britain; Telegraph takes firm position on whether cycle helmets should be mandatory; pass-agg van stickers + more”
If you take advice from the
If you take advice from the Telegraph then think again. Anecdote and individual experience is not evidence.
Wear a helmet if you want to but never read the Telegraph.
jasecd wrote:
And of course its behind a paywall/register-wall so you can’t accidentally read the web version.
brooksby wrote:
It popped up on my MSN news feed. I thought it’d kick off another lengthy helmet debate to be honest.
In answer to Señor Chris on
In answer to Señor Chris on how to reply to J B H Design. Thank you for sharing the web address. On their web site they give their telephone number and email (and contact form). Perhaps they are so interested, every cyclist should let them know?
I also wonder if cycleoptic obtained the image from a close pass by the van; in which case they may need reminding of rule 163 – because it looks like a close pass. Of course, cycleoptic may be filtering and they could be reminded of that rule.
I wonder when everyone at J B H Design last read (if ever) the Highway Code?
I wonder if that company went
I wonder if that company went to the trouble of actually creating a sticker just for their vans, given the nature of their business and how ‘non-standard’ it looks (they certainly didn’t just buy it in Office World). And, has been said, how best to reply “Yes, thanks; next?”…
I’ve just contacted the
I’ve just contacted the company asking them to explain their bigoted views regarding the passive aggressive van sticker. I think others should do the same.
PP
Pilot Pete wrote:
they have another van with the words ‘Caution, blindly following SatNav”. I would suggest that the stickers are to take the piss of all road users plus publicity and advertising of the design company.
Pilot Pete wrote:
Why?
The highway code thing is a
The highway code thing is a joke.
Some of you are seriously lacking in a sense of humour.
Rich_cb wrote:
…said Jeremy Clarkson
Rich_cb wrote:
Yeah. Getting knocked over by someone who has just passed you turning left across your path in broad daylight tends to blunt your sense of humour. As does drivers driving straight towards you on narrow country roads, then shouting at you and calling you a ‘cunt’ for being ‘in their way’. As does having a porsche overtake your club ride on a blind corner, approaching a bridge. As does having a milkshake thrown at you from a passing car. As does visiting your mate in hospital with a broken hip and shoulder blade after being knocked off by a white van driver, who then drove off. All in the space of three months. Funny that.
Zebulebu wrote:
And that stream of anecdotes makes the joke on the van wrong why?
It’s poking fun at some cyclists, just as their other stickers appear to be poking fun at other road users.
Lighten up.
Rich_cb wrote:
The state of road use in this country is not really a laughing matter, is it…
vonhelmet wrote:
I suggest you never go to a comedy club anywhere, ever, if you think that the state of the roads is an offensive topic for a joke.
Rich_cb wrote:
— Rich_cb I suggest you never go to a comedy club anywhere, ever, if you think that the state of the roads is an offensive topic for a joke.— vonhelmet
Comedy is for micro and macro-aggresive transphobic fascist bigots. All we have left is the gentle comedy of a dog sliding on an icy pond or a cyclist being egged.
Rich_cb wrote:
Oh do fuck off dear.
vonhelmet wrote:
Careful, you might offend someone.
Rich_cb wrote:
Because these aren’t ‘anecodtes’. They are reports of fact, based on my last three months of riding. And until the issue of cyclists being abused, seriously injured and killed is taken seriously, ‘having a laugh’ about it isn’t particularly fucking funny.
Zebulebu wrote:
Firstly, look up the definition of anecdote.
Secondly, the joke isn’t about cyclists getting killed etc it’s about the highway code and the frequent quoting of it by cyclists.
It’s a gentle joke aimed at a particular type of cyclist, seemingly over represented on this forum.
Rich_cb wrote:
You didn’t use ‘anecdote’ in the literal sense of the word. You used it in the context it’s often used – as an inferior comparator to empirical evidence. In that context, these are not ‘anecdotes’ – they are ‘statements’, supporting a factual proposition, which is – poking fun at cyclists quoting the Highway Code whilst hundreds are maimed and killed every year is not funny.
Zebulebu wrote:
So now you’re a mind reader as well.
You might not find it funny, did I?
Rich_cb wrote:
Whereas you know exactly why the sticker is there.
Why don’t you stop digging as you show no sympathy for those injured by van drivers.
hirsute wrote:
Point out the post where I showed a lack of sympathy?
Rich_cb wrote:
Point out the post where I showed a lack of sympathy?— hirsute
Your second post.
For all your bluster about mind reading, you went on to say ‘I deduced’.
Stop digging.
hirsute wrote:
Firstly, look up the meaning of deduce.
Secondly, I didn’t show a lack of sympathy I simply asked why those anecdotes had any relevance?
The sticker doesn’t insult cyclists, it doesn’t threaten them or victim blame, it just pokes a little fun.
Their other vans poke fun at other road users so they’re not even specifically targeting cyclists.
The desperate desire to be offended on this thread is nothing short of pathetic.
Stop digging and get a sense of humour.
Rich_cb wrote:
It’s one of those irregular verbs then. I deduce, you guess, he uses mindreading.
You replied to someone who had related incidents which had lead to a serious injury with ‘lighten up’ and showed no sympathy.
If you had read properly what people have said on this article, you wouldn’t be glibly telling us all to get a sense of humour.
hirsute wrote:
The other poster told me why I had used a word and that I had deliberately used it in a non-literal way despite the fact that using its literal meaning made perfect sense and was entirely appropriate. That’s not a deduction as it doesn’t follow any logic.
Looking at the van sign in the context of the signs on the other vans the logical conclusion is that is it an attempt at humour and that it concerns cyclists and the highway code. Hence a deduction.
We all have anecdotes about poor driving on the roads.
Why is that relevant to a joke? Are van drivers not allowed to make jokes because some van drivers drive poorly? Does that extend to cyclists? Pedestrians? Any other group you can think of?
Rich_cb wrote:
That was your third post not your second.
Never mind, you clearly don’t understand why people have responded in the way they have.
hirsute wrote:
Many drivers are dangerous, some deliberately so. Anyone that rides regularly on our roads will have anecdotes galore regarding dangerous driving.
That does not make every driver culpable and it shouldn’t preclude every driver from making light-hearted jokes even if they are at our expense.
A lot of the comments on here look like Liam Neeson style collective responsibility.
Is there another reason for getting annoyed at this joke?
Rich_cb wrote:
And you know all this because…?
brooksby wrote:
i took it as a joke on the oft repeated stickers warning cyclists not pass these vehicles because of blind spots which are nothing more then excuses of ‘well we warned them’.
brooksby wrote:
I deduced it was a joke about cyclists and the highway code by carefully analysing the use of the words ‘cyclists’ and ‘highway code’.
Zebulebu wrote:
Because these aren’t ‘anecodtes’. They are reports of fact, based on my last three months of riding. And until the issue of cyclists being abused, seriously injured and killed is taken seriously, ‘having a laugh’ about it isn’t particularly fucking funny.— Rich_cb
Totally agree my sense of humour for that kind of stuff has long been worn out by repeatedly being near missed by objects that can kill me and no one giving a damn to fix it
That helmet dude needs to up
That helmet dude needs to up his bike skills. Debris stuck in the front wheels. Dog at my homework…
BtBS is still away. That has
BtBS is still away. That has tended to lower the volume of the “debate” somewhat.
Waitrose gives me a free Telegraph every so often, I do have to explain that I will never read it, so nasty, but there is something about a broadsheet for putting under the bicycles for storage and cleaning. The tabloid size is just not as effective. Even the Guardians attemp at the parisian size didn’t work, I very much missed the broadsheet Indy.
I do understand that I am contributing to their numbers and therefore ad revenue, but I need a cleanish floor, better half and her tolerance of my habit and all that.
ktache wrote:
The free Telegraph is always handy if you run out of toilet paper.
Interesting, slightly OT
Interesting, slightly OT article about US football in the Grauniad:
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/sep/06/helmets-dont-eliminate-concussions-its-time-for-the-nfl-to-ditch-them
brooksby wrote:
That’s overly simplistic as far as protective qualities are concerned – as are many helmet designs – but is more to do with the use of the helmet, and increased strikes due to a perceived safety aspect, in the NFL.. that is different to their stituation in cycling, even considering risk compensation.
Most helmets are designed to reduce the linear acceleration during a collision, the acceleration is correlated to cranial injuries hence reducing it *may* help in reducing the severity of such an injury including – possibly – concussions. It’s also been known for a long time that rotational accelerations can be heavily implicated in concussions and other brain injuries (seen years ago, for example, in the military with glancing impacts from bullets) – this is one of the reasons for interest in technologies such as MIPS. For some generally interesting details on TBIs this might be worth looking at for some (there’s plenty more information out there obviously…)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3979340/
brooksby wrote:
Yes I saw that today but thought that sums up perfectly what I’ve been trying to tell people about concussions in these cycle helmet debates for years now.
Awavey wrote:
Interesting, slightly OT article about US football in the Grauniad:
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/sep/06/helmets-dont-eliminate-concussions-its-time-for-the-nfl-to-ditch-them
— brooksby Yes I saw that today but thought that sums up perfectly what I’ve been trying to tell people about concussions in these cycle helmet debates for years now.
I do think this is misrepresented. Helmets aren’t going to stop concussion – as I am currently suffering from post-concussion syndrome following a bike crash, I can vouch for that. However, the helmet did mean the percussive injury (which was enough to crack my helmet in two) was taken by the helmet, preventing my skull from taking it and leaking brain all over the road.
Helmets may not stop concussion, but they have a role in reducing death and life changing injury.
cjf82 wrote:
Your helmet failed badly if it split in two. The other thing to consider is that in many cases your head may not have even the contacted the ground at all if it had not been massively bigger due to a helmet. They are not always going to make an crash better.
5 people dead a day, 2
5 people dead a day, 2 cyclists killed a week, LMFAO!