A cyclist says she suffered a broken arm after a Parkrun participant cut into a cycle lane and knocked her off her bike during Saturday’s Swansea Bay run, the incident coming just two weeks after the volunteer-run event’s organisers apologised for participants directing “abusive language” at cyclists and pedestrians and “barging” a female rider on her way to work.
Speaking to WalesOnline, a 27-year-old cyclist who asked to remain anonymous said they suffered a broken arm in a crash caused by a runner cutting into a cycle lane during the Swansea Bay Parkrun on Saturday (9 August). The injured woman suggested the free running event had now become “dangerous” and said it was “disappointing that the personal best is worth more than stopping”, that after the runner responsible apparently did not stop after the collision.
Saturday’s Swansea Bay Parkrun saw more than 600 participants complete the 5km course, which uses a shared-use route, pictures on the event’s website showing participants running on a stretch with a designated cycle route running parallel to a pedestrian path. Some have questioned the suitability of the route, which is narrow in points, the event’s organisers recently confirming that it does not pay for an exclusive right to the path and the volunteer-run event relies on participants cooperating with the public using the path at the same time.
Two weeks ago Swansea Bay Parkrun’s organisers apologised for what they described as the worst feedback in the event’s history, including multiple reports of runners directing “abusive language” at cyclists and “barging” a female cyclist on her commute.
The organisers called out the behaviour of “a minority” of participants and said there had been “significant disregard of the shared path etiquette”.
“It’s a brilliant event and getting people outdoors is so important, but it needs to be done in a way that’s safe for everyone”
A week and a half on from that statement and the latest incident has been reported, raising more questions about runners’ behaviour and the suitability of the route along shared-use paths open to the public. We have contacted Swansea Bay Parkrun for comment about the latest allegation, but had not received a reply at the time of publishing.
“I was on the side of the path reserved for cyclists when a runner who might have seen an opportunity to overtake a slower group and without looking, jumped on to the cycling side of the path,” the cyclist told WalesOnline.
“He did this very suddenly, and I was unable to avoid him. As such we were involved in a high impact crash and I came off my bike. It’s disappointing that the personal best is worth more than stopping and checking the person you’ve just hit to the ground’s alright — especially after the organisers issued the apology and kind of had a word with all these runners, that behaviour still seems to be an issue.
“If people are going to be doing this sort of thing, it’s just not safe. There needs to be a shared code of respect — there’s a white line down the middle of the path for a reason.”
The cyclist did save praise for the volunteers marshalling the Parkrun who were “absolutely brilliant” and gave medical attention before helping her home, however the rider says she’s been “frustrated” by the subsequent response since reporting the incident to the event’s organisers.
“They apologised and said they were looking at ways to change things,” she explained. “It’s disappointing that these issues haven’t been mitigated already despite it being brought up multiple times. I think it’s outgrown the space it is held in. It’s a lot of people to be going down quite a small stretch of path really.
“It’s a brilliant event and getting people outdoors is so important, but it needs to be done in a way that’s safe for everyone. If what had happened to me happened to a child or someone who’s a bit older, it could’ve caused some really serious damage.”
The incident is likely to be an uncomfortable one for the event’s organisers who just two weeks ago were warning participants to avoid “behaviour which puts our Parkrun at risk”, that after the aforementioned reports of abuse and barging members of the public out the way.
A statement put out at the time said: “We are really sad to report that we have received several reports today — from participants, from marshals and from two members of the public — about the conduct of a minority of participants today.
“In particular, abusive language towards cyclists, barging of a female member of the public on her way to work and significant disregard of the shared path etiquette. The nature of each of these incidents is such that they have been logged and reported to Parkrun HQ. It is likely that the complainants will take the matters up with both Parkrun HQ and with Swansea Council.
“As a core team, supported by four dozen volunteers we are at a loss as to what more we can do or say to reinforce the need to ‘share with care and kindness’. We do not pay for the right to have exclusive use of the path — the first timers’ welcome and the run director’s briefing all emphasise this. As have many posts on our Facebook page and website. (The most recent following a similar report on the 12th April this year).
“As event directors and run directors we are having to respond to, very understandably, disgruntled path users. We apologise to them, we explain what we do to try and ensure all path users are safe and can enjoy use of a community asset — what else can we do?! It is so upsetting to receive feedback and reports like we have today — today is the worst it has been ever.
“As a core team we are feeling really disappointed and despondent — Parkrun should be a joy, something positive, something inspirational, something inclusive. For us as a core team, it’s more than just going home after a run, jog, walk, wheel or push… we’re still sorting the results, dealing with queries, planning for next week, filling the roster, updating the Risk Assessments, fundraising for new kit, washing the pacer bibs and volunteer vests … and sadly today, responding to these complaints about the behaviour of our participants.
“If you love Parkrun, if you value what it offers you and our community we need your help — we need you to share with care and kindness and encourage and support others to do so — or our event will be lost.”
Swansea Bay Parkrun’s organisers have been contacted for comment on the latest allegation.
53 thoughts on ““It’s disappointing the PB is worth more than stopping”: Cyclist broke arm when Parkrunner cut into cycle lane and caused crash, two weeks after organisers apologised for runners’ “abusive language” at cyclists and pedestrians”
perhaps critical mass can
perhaps critical mass can arrange an event making use of the cycle path during parkrun times, everyone wear a camera.
Well, being arseholes en
Well, being arseholes en masse is one option. Perhaps having that event just after or just before the run would be better.
Then go for a coffee.
You’ll attract a few people who regret that having done the run and then the ride there’s no provision for swimming back parallel.
Wouldn’t they be wanting to
Wouldn’t they be wanting to swim to the event?
Theres something deeply sad
Theres something deeply sad about taking what is a fun run so seriously that you are putting other people at risk. If you want to set 5K PBs then do it on your own or as part of a small club. Then again, I guess all your bros give you those sweet high fives when you place top 200 on your local park run leaderboard.
It seems like this could be
It seems like this could be at least mitigated a bit by just phasing start times a little. You’d still have the same thoughtless individuals there, but they’d have fewer people at any one time to try to barge their way past.
This seems reasonable. There
This seems reasonable. There are some issues, though.
Somehow, different start times would have to be matched to different finish times. Time for a 5k ranges from around 15 minutes to an hour, sometimes longer (park walkers are part of the ‘family’). Splitting start times to wider than an hour would require more volunteers, or longer volunteering – it would become difficult to attract the support needed.
The way Parkrun works is that there aren’t entry bands, timing chips, tokens or similar through the run. You get a run time (personal timing is your own affair) based on the time from the whistle to when you cross the line. Runners are funneled to avoid overtaking between the finish line and the tokens; tokens are taken to the volunteers who match the numbered token to your personal bar code.
Anything to cater for staggered start times would require additional input from runners who may not be familiar with the idiosyncrasies of that event, leading to errors. Or it would require all Parkrun events to change their processes. Swansea Bay is quite large at 500+ on average; others have an average of fewer than 100.
IMHO, briefings sometimes suffer from:
Swansea may need firmer briefing or more marshals, especially at the points of greater potential conflict. It may also need people just to stop being idiots.
But that all cuts both ways. Just as cyclists are expected to give way to pedestrians, so pedestrians are expected to be aware of their surroundings and other users of the way. An organised event should not expect exclusive use of a park if they haven’t arranged for that; neither should other users. Each is entitled to some careful use. I’m not there; I haven’t seen the conflict, but I would expect other users to be accepting that that there is a large body of people co-using the area and to be looking to negotiate space accordingly.
GMBasix wrote:
It seems like, in this case, and some others, it doesn’t work. And just like with anything else, as it grows, it will need to evolve. For the organisers simply to throw their hands up in the air and say “I don’t really see what more were can do” isn’t really an acceptable response.
mdavidford wrote:
More likely this particular event has reached the point where it has outgrown its traditional route and needs to find a new one. It happens to a lot of Parkruns at some point in time.
I used to ParkRun, but after
I used to ParkRun, but after Lockdown, my local event started regularly attracting 700+ people. No thank you!
There are people that run the 5km course in 16 minutes. At that pace, you would think they would be getting more from a properly organised race, rather than an event to encourage more people to exercise.
Could ParkRun maybe include/allow Strava timings to be included in their weekly leaderboard? Perhaps the more serious runners would set their times when it is less busy (and therefore they are less likely to be held up by other ParkRunners!)
I strongly doubt that the
I strongly doubt that the faster runners are where the conflict arises. One of the compounding factors giving them their times is that they are clear of the crowds by the time they finish. The bottleneck is likely to be around the 25-45 minute 5k runners, which is the bulk of the runners.
They’d rather be the fastest
They’d rather be the fastest at parkrun than have to compete with serious runners.
bensynnock wrote:
Most of the fast runners at my Parkrun also appear towards the top of the leaderboard at the local races. The reality is that Parkrun happens every week, races happen way less frequently than that, so a lot regular runners are inevitably going to be taking part, given that running in the park on a Saturday among other runners is generally preferable to running on your own.
Nothing to do with being “fastest at Parkrun rather than have to compete with serious runners”.
A lot of the better runners
A lot of the better runners will compete in higher standard races as well as the park run. They will often use the parkrun as a hard training session or as a sounding board to assess their level of fitness (particularly in winter when there are fewer road races and cross country racing doesn’t always give an accurate picture). Parkruns are also attractive if you are pressed for time as they start and finish early. Most league cross country races take up the whole day because they usually take place on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon.
I still find it strange
I still find it strange though. Someone running ParkRun in 16 minutes isn’t going to care about 95% of the other ParkRunners, other than having to get past them if the course has laps (which my local does – in fact all five different ParkRuns I’ve done had laps)
This would then apply to anyone hunting a PB – they would run it quicker if they didn’t have to get past a load of people.
I think ParkRun is fanastic, by the way. Its gotten lots of people out exercising and that is a really good thing. Its even better when they use it as social exercising – people are more likely to keep doing it.
I am not part of a cycling club, but I would imagine there are limits to the number of people that go out in a single group? I can’t remember the last time I ever spotted more than maybe a dozen cyclists together, yet I’m sure there are clubs with more than a dozen regular members.
As always – what makes sense in my head, rarely tallies with reality!
Faster runners will have to
Faster runners will have to pass others when they lap them, but the field will have got strung out to some extent by then. Many events involve passing slower or fading runners at some point.
Around twelve is a decent number for a cycling group. I have been out in groups of 20, which works ok as long as they stick to two abreast and get into single file when required. The biggest problem with such a large group is the queue it causes at the coffee shop 😃
Mr Blackbird wrote:
makes it easier to elbow those post-ParkRun coffee drinkers out of the way though
Runners are the bane of my
Runners are the bane of my life cycling along the Thames.
There are 2 behaviours that are very consistent for many runners:
1. not slowing down and sprinting through groups of walkers and cyclists who have themselves slowed down or stopped
2. when cycling on the far left of the path many runners approaching head on swap sides right at the last minute and this run into cyclists and get irritated about the conflict they have created
There are also an increasing number of running events (half marathons) organised “non competitive 10K runs”‘and the like that result in many hundreds or runners running at speed on narrow paths with zero consideration for any other path users.
This sounds a lot like the
This sounds a lot like the ‘many’ cyclists who are constantly haring around on the pavements, blowing through red lights, making London’s parks a no-go area, and running over wheelchair users. Maybe we need to designate special areas where we can contain both sets, so they can contend with each other while the rest of us can go around in comfort and safety.
How do you run over a
How do you run over a wheelchair on a bike? You’d end up on the floor.
bensynnock wrote:
Paging Danny McAskill…
I’ll have to defer to our
I’ll have to defer to our resident expert on that one – apparently it happens to them about ten times a day.
Red lights only exist because
Red lights only exist because of how dangerous drivers are. They are simply not needed for cyclists. In fact at a busy interchange in Amsterdam they solved the issue by removing traffic lights. Trams, cyclists, pedestrians and even the occasional car flow seemlessly.
OK. But what does that have
OK. But what does that have to do with the price of fish?
open_roads wrote:
I’m struggling to picture this.
If the runners are on the same side of the path as you, and then swap sides, how do they run into you?
If the runners are on the opposite side of the path to you, why would they swap to your side and run into you?
I think they might mean what
I think they might mean what I have frequently experienced riding along the Thames path, which is runners who run on the right hand side of the path and look as if they aren’t going to move over, but then when they get close suddenly veer out of the way, by which time you’ve started to move across to avoid a collision and so you come into conflict in the middle of the path. The Thames path and many other shared spaces would be a lot easier to use if runners (and quite a number of cyclists, to be fair) would use basic road discipline and stick to the left-hand side. The entrance to Battersea Park from Battersea power station is a particularly good (or bad) example of this, one has to be constantly on the alert and covering the brakes due to the large number of users (of all types) who want to take the “racing line” straight through the S bend on the path instead of following the curves.
Yes, I wondered if that’s
Yes, I wondered if that’s what they meant. In which case, surely both parties have swapped sides at the last minute so it seems a bit presumptuous to conclude it’s the runner who causes the collision.
While I do tend to walk on the left, often indicate with a finger when running and invariably do a shoulder check even to overtake when walking / pushing a shopping trolley (old habits die hard) there’s no particular logic in expecting people using a foot / shared path to follow road rules – indeed, you might expect Londoners to be more accustomed to overtaking on the left.
EDIT – actually, I’ll backtrack a bit on that. A footpath / shared path is still classified as a road and so there is a logic to keeping left. But I wouldn’t necessarily expect people to do so.
To be honest, I’ve seen
To be honest, I’ve seen similar behavior during cycling events so it’s not just a running thing. It’s an arrogant, entitled people thing.
Reduce the numbers by charging a fee and requiring a displayed race number.
Some of the courses can be
Some of the courses can be very frustrating, overcrowded with little opportunity to run at your own pace until well into the event. That’s before you factor in the poor souls not involved with Parkrun trying to use the paths.
The organisers need a limit on the number of entrants and if necessary run different paced groups in waves. It’s not an excuse for not behaving in a safe and respectful way whatever the frustrations, but the organisers need to reduce the potential for conflicts that demonstrably exist.
My local (regularly 700+
My local (regularly 700+ runners) doesn’t have waves but has suggested zones at the start – if you think you’re going sub 18 mins, stand here, sub 20 here etc. Informal but reasonably effective.
Imagine the national outrage
Imagine the national outrage and frothing of the right wing press if just 10% of that number of runners were cyclists racing along a shared use path every Saturday and injuring other folk.
As it happens I’m currently directly opposite the turnaround point of this route and can’t believe 500 folk run en masse along this very busy shared route. The section along Ashley Road Golf Course is half the width of section of the prom seen in article header photo and it’s is 44% of the route.
When I ran MTB events, it was always done on legally closed or private paths.
Parkrun is very good for
Parkrun is very good for people, and in aggregate, for the population in general*. 500 is a bit big, the natural solution is another parkrun nearby to attract half of them away.
Sharing doesn’t mean that you should not need to take note of a lot of other people using whatever it is.
* As is cycling, but currently in ways less focussed in time. Although the London to Brighton ride was a huge thing when I last rode it, last century.
I have nothing against
I have nothing against Parkruns and it’s great that lots of folk get involved. But 500+folk running along a shared use path which for 44% of the route is along a path half the width of the crammed section shown in the header pic is, as has been clearly demonstrated, a recipe for conflict. That section is also just before the turnaround to head back to start, which makes it even worse.
The London to Brighton Ride is bigger than it was last century. But roads are closed for that event.
Shouldn’t we be making sure
Shouldn’t we be making sure cyclists and pedestrians cannot come into conflict with each other? I can’t really get behind the notion of shared paths, especially when one is being used for a sporting event. We wouldn’t permit a cycle race on a pavement for the very fact that it endangers pedestrians, so why have them running on a shared path as well? Even if there isn’t a parkrun on, I still cannot see why pedestrians and cyclists share the same piece of tarmac. It’s absurd.
Preach, brother!
Preach, brother!
https://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2014/11/shared-use-paths-create-conflict-and.html
OTOH some degree of “recreation” / *infrequent* event pragmatism is surely possible? Though when some organised group gets so popular there are hundreds turning up in the same space every week perhaps it’s time to look at that again?
That would go for cycling too, were it ever that popular. London parks…? 😉
There is a limited amount of
There is a limited amount of space, on the world.
Occasionally a lot of people want to pass over the same bit.
I have a foot in both camps
I have a foot in both camps here being an ex runner. Hundreds and hundreds of running events take place over the year. Many of these are held on shared pedestrian and cycle paths in parks. This has to happen because it isn’t feasible to close off public parks at weekends. Even the national 12 stage road relay takes place in Sutton park on pathways (albeit wide ones) shared with pedestrians and cyclists. Believe me, runners feel their existence is threatened just as much as cyclists do.
Happily, collisions like the one described are rare.
Generally all parties work well to accommodate others. But some allowance and awareness has to be made towards the competitors (just as in a cycling time trial on roads).
The real danger is when people expect to be able to behave brainlessly, without awareness without consequence (ie everyone has to look out for them) Unfortunately park authorities often indulge this stance – probably a result of the increasing litigation culture in the UK.
100’s of people running as a
100’s of people running as a single group making loads of noise and using the full width of the canal paths in Hackney on a Sunday morning when people want some peace and quiet. Not my idea of joy. Thankfully I’m usually still in bed and just hear the horde pass. I can’t imagine the chaos further up the path where only two people can pass.
Hierarchy of vulnerability
Hierarchy of vulnerability cyclist should look out for pedestrians
The hierarchy of road users
The hierarchy of road users places a greater responsibility on cyclists to have regard for the safety of pedestrians. But it’s accompanied by an admonition that ALL road users have a responsibility to be considerate and mindful of the safety of others. It certainly doesn’t give those on foot carte blanche to behave however they like and then claim it’s cyclists’ responsibility if an incident occurs.
So I take it that you would
So I take it that you would not drive along a busy street in case someone jumped out into the road unexpectedly?
The runner doing a runner tells you everything about him/her, leaving the scene of an incident when someone was injured is indefensible.
She was.
She was.
Ped jumped in front of her at zero notice.
Mikej983 wrote:
But runners etiquette, endorsed and embraced by most running clubs in the UK and also Park Run, and should more broadly apply to all scenarios of mixed/ shared use paths and highways.
Basically boils down to this
“It is the responsibility of the person travelling/ moving faster to watch out for those going slower”
So many parkruns are getting
So many parkruns are getting way too over crowded. One near me gets easy 700+. I run and cycle but running in a group like that is just not fun, especially when the paths get stupidly narrow for so many runners. /Start rant Parkrun has also become that annoyance of people turning up kitted like they are doing an ultra marathon with stupid vests and so no… /End rant.
A very quick, simple and
A very quick, simple and effective way to curb antisocial behaviour at Parkruns is for the organisers* to set everyone’s finish time to that of the slowest runner at any event where antisocial behaviour has been reported by (or to) the martials.
You’d be amazed how quickly people can sort out the problem when their race finish time is being knocked back to about 65 minutes.
*I’m writing this as a former Run Director of my local Parkrun. We did have to set everyone’s finish times to a default value on one occasion when the finish time data was corrupted, so I know it can be done.
Avicenna wrote:
swanseabay@parkrun.com [👍]
Groups of people always stop
Groups of people always stop paying attention to what’s happening outside the group.
Last weekend it was a group of 8 or 10 cyclists coming toward me on a relatively narrow road and spread across the width of it. On my side I was cruising nicely at about 30-35kph and wondering if/when anyone was going to lay off talking and actually notice the cyclist on the other side of the road. Eventually, a couple of them slid over enough to let me squeeze past but only after I’d had to put the brakes on.
This is just a small sample
This is just a small sample of what the rest of us have to put up with from cyclists every day . The number of times I’ve been hit by cystitis on the pavement in my wheelchair only on Tuesday a cyclist missed me by inches whilst I was going through a very busy shopping centre that had clear signs telling cyclists they must dismount another cyclist that can’t even read
Wheelywheelygood wrote:
Beginning to make sense now why you always seem so unreasonably angry with the world.
They should be paying more
They should be paying more attention to personal hygiene. Maybe it’s their incontinence pads.
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/cystitis/
Perhaps you should stay in on
Perhaps you should stay in on Tuesday. You should be OK the rest of the week.
Wheelywheelygood wrote:
Cranberry juice is very good for that, I’ve been told.
Wheelywheelygood wrote:
Sounds sensible – help those with reading difficulties. Or do the “cyclists must dismount another cyclist that can’t even read” signs set out a kind of “shopping lists” here and proclaim a joust? What does the cyclist that dismounts the illiterate win?
Or maybe cyclist a is
Or maybe cyclist a is sneakily trying to get around the restriction by being mounted on cyclist b, who couldn’t read the sign?