Broadcaster and presenter Dan Walker was injured in a collision while cycling this morning, sharing pictures from the back of an ambulance.
The former BBC Breakfast host who now works for Channel 5 took up cycling last year, citing the faster commuting times in London versus hailing a cab, and said he had a “bit of an accident this morning” and was “glad to be alive after getting hit by a car on my bike”.
Bit of an accident this morning.
Glad to be alive after getting hit by a car on my bike. Face is a mess but I don’t think anything is broken. Thanks to Shaun and Jamie for sorting me out and the lovely copper at the scene.
This is my smiling ?
Thankful for our NHS ❤️ pic.twitter.com/jt4FdaQDUU— Dan Walker (@mrdanwalker) February 20, 2023
Walker shared pictures of his facial injuries, which he described as a “mess” but added that he does not think he suffered any broken bones in the collision.
It is unclear where the incident occurred, with the BBC reporting its former employee lives in Sheffield and the pictures were taken in a Yorkshire Ambulance Service vehicle
In previous interviews about cycling, Walker has talked about enjoying cycling through London to get to work.
Dan, so sorry to hear this. Looks really painful. Hoping for a good recovery. Sending love.
— Jeremy Vine (@theJeremyVine) February 20, 2023
I hope you recover quickly @mrdanwalker! Despite Dan’s injuries, he is actually very fortunate. 111 UK cyclist fatalities last year. We must never accept this. All relevant stakeholders must strive to reduce road danger and every single road user has a responsibility to be safe.
— Andy Cox (@AndyCoxDCS) February 20, 2023
Speaking to the Mirror about taking up cycling last year, Walker said: “It’s an eco thing.”
> Cycling celebrities — famous folk who love to ride their bikes
“‘I’ve worked in London and taxis are a nightmare and I started to get around on the bike. I can go from Downing Street to St Pancras in about 15 minutes, and it’s about 30 minutes in a taxi so although I feel like a bit of a geek sometimes, I’m very much enjoying it.”
Minus 4 when I set off this morning ?⛄️
A day to take great care and wrap up warm pic.twitter.com/GXK7prN5tE— Dan Walker (@mrdanwalker) December 13, 2022
“Face is a mess but I don’t think anything is broken,” he told his Twitter followers after this morning’s incident, attracting messages of support from Jeremy Vine and DCS Andy Cox among others.
Thanks for all your kindness. Jamie & Shaun were so great in the ambulance – not sure I was making much sense ?Thanks to Conor the copper, Charlotte in x-ray & Hannah (below) for being so considerate & brilliant in such a busy A & E
2/3 pic.twitter.com/A3Cggqu4Lg— Dan Walker (@mrdanwalker) February 20, 2023
The helmet I was wearing saved my life today so – if you’re on a bike – get one on your head.
Smashed my watch & phone, ruined my trousers, my bike is a mess but I’m still here ??
Currently eating soup through a straw and being looked after by this gorgeous, tired nurse ❤️
3/3 pic.twitter.com/slELcbFJdL— Dan Walker (@mrdanwalker) February 20, 2023
“Thanks to Shaun and Jamie for sorting me out and the lovely copper at the scene. This is my [sic] smiling. Thankful for our NHS”
The BBC’s reporting of the incident has attracted criticism from some. BBC South East said Walker had suffered his injuries after “colliding with a car while cycling” despite him saying he had been “hit by a car [driver]”.
Him: “Glad to be alive after getting hit by a car on my bike”
You: “colliding with a car”Can’t you see how your choice of language changes perceptions?
— LukeB_MTB @mastodon.social (@LukeB_MTB) February 20, 2023
Another reply added: “Who edits this stuff? Unless you think ‘BBC breakfast host eats chicken’ is the same as ‘chicken eats BBC breakfast host’ the words you choose matter. Try replacing ‘car’ with ‘driver’ too”.
I presume by the headline this was a stationary correctly parked car with no occupants? ? ? ?
— Edouard Lapaglie (@EDFROG) February 20, 2023
71 thoughts on “Dan Walker “glad to be alive” after being hit by a driver while cycling”
He’s certainly not getting
He’s certainly not getting into one of Martin’s parties looking like that.
If you want to get annoyed,
If you want to get annoyed, read the comments on the Daily Hate coverage of this.
Just mark ’em down and put
Just mark ’em down and put one of your own in.
OldRidgeback wrote:
Most of them are so moronic you have to laugh.
Eg ‘Our Victorian roads are not wide enough for bikes’. Hahaha. Has he even seen a car let alone an SUV.
IanMK wrote:
If you want to get annoyed, read the comments on the Daily Hate coverage of this.
— IanMK Most of them are so moronic you have to laugh. Eg ‘Our Victorian roads are not wide enough for bikes’. Hahaha. Has he even seen a car let alone an SUV.— OldRidgeback
Yep I saw that one and thought the person who posted it was probably too dim to appreciate the irony of what they’d written. They probably think irony is what you get when you drink Guinness.
Didn’t have the energy to get
Didn’t have the energy to get annoyed they were that depressing. Just kept hitting the red button.
Best wishes to Dan for a
Best wishes to Dan for a swift and full recovery.
Also, chapeau to the first responders who treated him.
First of all, best wishes to
First of all, best wishes to Dan, hope you get well soon. My clarinet teacher, the best in the country, was involved in an airplane crash in the Himalayas many years ago. Along with her two colleagues she was rescued by a group of mysterious monks who looked after them and granted them superpowers. She became supremely gifted in the hearing department. Allegedly she could hear a 5p piece falling out of someone’s pocket from 200 yards away. When she moved to Yorkshire however, she soon realised she wasn’t as gifted as she thought as most people had the same ability. You couldn’t make it up. I went to Gloucester today, saw a guy with the most rusted chain and cassette I’ve ever seen.
Was she in The Champions?
Was she in The Champions?
I’m not sure. She does claim
I’m not sure. She does claim to have played the part of Elsie Tanner in Coronation Street and the part of slow witted Benny (her most challenging role) in Crossroads, where in many scenes she played opposite Miss Diane who was married in real life to Carl Wayne out of the pop group The Move starring Roy Wood who would later become Wizzard. Actually I’m beginning to think she is a bit of a fantasist. I can’t complain though, my clarinet playing has improved tremendously because she is the best teacher in this country and therefore the world. I’m expecting a call from the Chicago Symphony Orchestra any time soon. Or the Berlin Philharmonic. Or the Upper Ramsbottom Wind Band. You couldn’t make it up.
And another thing – why is
And another thing – why is “duelling banjos” called “duelling banjos” when one of the parts is played on guitar? You couldn’t make it up. Actually I’ve just checked and the original was played using two banjos. So I’ll shut up now.
Okay, I’m just back slowly
Okay, I’m just going to back slowly away from the keyboard.
‘Helmet saved my life’, says Dan Walker after bike collided with car
Argos74 wrote:
“Bike collided with car”?
Focussing on PPE rather than the cause of the collision?
I’m gonna get my bingo card out
Argos74 wrote:
Can’t remember anything, but it’s a good job he was wearing a helmet.
You couldn’t make it up!
Owd Big 'Ead wrote:
Are you insinuating the helmet made Dan’s injury worse?
ShutTheFrontDawes wrote:
Okay, I’m just going to back slowly away from the keyboard.
‘Helmet saved my life’, says Dan Walker after bike collided with car
— ShutTheFrontDawes Can’t remember anything, but it’s a good job he was wearing a helmet. You couldn’t make it up!— Owd Big 'Ead Are you insinuating the helmet made Dan’s injury worse?— Argos74
Surely OBE’s point is that if Mr Walker cannot remember anything about the collision, how does he know that it was the helmet that saved his life?
brooksby wrote:
You’re kidding, right?
ShutTheFrontDawes wrote:
Okay, I’m just going to back slowly away from the keyboard.
‘Helmet saved my life’, says Dan Walker after bike collided with car
— ShutTheFrontDawes Can’t remember anything, but it’s a good job he was wearing a helmet. You couldn’t make it up!— brooksby Are you insinuating the helmet made Dan’s injury worse?— ShutTheFrontDawes
Surely OBE’s point is that if Mr Walker cannot remember anything about the collision, how does he know that it was the helmet that saved his life?
— Owd Big 'Ead You’re kidding, right?— Argos74
Not at all. I’m open to alternative opinions, but I’m not sure that someone with no memory of an incident counts as a good witness to that incident…
brooksby wrote:
Having no memory of it sounds like he suffered some concussion, so maybe a better position would be to implore cyclists and drivers to take more care on the roads to avoid collisions.
It’s annoying that the police seem to be uninterested in the incident too.
(I’m puzzled by the mention of a furry nurse)
hawkinspeter wrote:
Don’t go looking that up on Pornhub. Or maybe do 😉
hawkinspeter wrote:
I’ve got a sinking feeling I know where this is going…
brooksby wrote:
Surely OBE’s point is that if Mr Walker cannot remember anything about the collision, how does he know that it was the helmet that saved his life?
— ShutTheFrontDawes You’re kidding, right?— Owd Big 'Ead
Not at all. I’m open to alternative opinions, but I’m not sure that someone with no memory of an incident counts as a good witness to that incident…— Argos74
He might be able to piece it together. Given how his face looks, and I expect his helmet doesn’t look as pristine as that lovely ‘before’ photo we have in the article, accounts from others and input from medical professionals, I think he might have a good idea that his helmet was a benefit in this incident.
Note how the upper sections of his head (which would have been covered by a helmet) look rather different to the lower sections (not covered by a helmet). It doesn’t take a rocket surgeon.
And he seems confident, so good for him.
ShutTheFrontDawes wrote:
The reality is it is far more likely that the helmet prevented scalp + forehead injuries comparable to the other injuries he received (both to his face and hand). Yet we get proclaimations all over the media about how it saved his life and everyone should wear one (and why do we need to do anything else to make cycling safer…)
qwerty360 wrote:
The reality is it is far more likely that the helmet prevented scalp + forehead injuries comparable to the other injuries he received (both to his face and hand). Yet we get proclaimations all over the media about how it saved his life and everyone should wear one (and why do we need to do anything else to make cycling safer…)— ShutTheFrontDawes
Wow, an eye witness! You should contact Dan and let him know that you saw his collision first-hand. He might need your support for insurance purposes.
I just wanted to make the
I just wanted to make the 60th comment on this story and say I’m going out on my bike later this evening.
I hope you wore a plant pot
I hope you wore a plant pot on your head.
If you want to wear a helmet,
If you want to wear a helmet, then wear one. If you don’t, no problem, then don’t.
But people need to stop losing their minds whenever somebody mentions wearing a helmet….FFS
Velophaart_95 wrote:
Repeat for hi-viz, daytime lights usage, tyre widths, tubeless, choice & availability of various brake types, frame materials, etc.
Looks like Dan is happy to
Looks like Dan is happy to wear a helmet, but not too fussed about segregated cycling infrastructure:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11775165/Busy-stretch-road-ex-BBCs-Dan-Walker-knocked-bike-notorious-accident-blackspot.html
https://goo.gl/maps/tYpHLX1fhu4FBvRq7
Whilst I’ll defend anybody’s right to choose to not use either, I’d place segregated infrastructure above a helmet when it comes to safety advice.
(oh, and not sure where the DM are getting 40 bike crashes, cyclestreets only has 13 incidents from 1999-2021)
Had a look – on the side you
Had a look – on the side you show (west) the infra’s… not great. I might be tempted to give it a miss – except the roundabout just looks unsuitable for cycling.
On the east side – ooh – cycle paths either side (albeit narrow, and on the inside of pedestrians…)! And then after about 100 metres back to normal a couple of feet of “advisory cycle lane”!
oh yep, it’s rubbish infra,
oh yep, it’s rubbish infra, but it does offer a way to negotiate that horrendous looking roundabout without having to worry about drivers.
As usual with rubbish cycling infra, you trade speed for safety, it’s a lot slower with a level change and several 90 degree turns. I suspect I would be tempted to avoid it too and dice with the drivers on the roundabout.
I wonder if he was attempting to go ahead from the left-turn lane, which you are allowed to do on a bicycle, but I’m sure many drivers wouldn’t know that.(edit: nope, just seen the dashcam footage, he was in a lane marked for the direction he wished to travel – although it looks like the undertaking driver might have used the left-turn lane to go ahead).
“While massive coverage is
“While massive coverage is given to a news person’s comments on helmets, this is what really should be grabbing the attention of people genuinely concerned with the safety of cyclists.”
“I’m done, exhausted, worn down, 15 reports to Essex Police since the start of the year, 8 warning letters, 2 nfa, just 5 courses/conditional offers. The latest were 3 I reported from my ride on Sunday all warning letters. 1/”
“And that’s based on me just reporting the worst ones, there were plenty of others that I didn’t bother with knowing Essex wouldn’t do a thing. I just can’t see the benefit anymore, the time and effort it takes to report each one for Essex to just do nothing. 2/”
https://twitter.com/CHAIRRDRF/status/1628036349528879105
Let’s see how the BBC decided
Let’s see how the BBC decided to report a driver hitting a cyclist… Having been the subject of a very close pass this morning while on the school run with two kids on the bike, which the driver explained when I inevitably caught up was due to my not riding in the gutter, I’m just done with this shit.
Are we still doing the old
Are we still doing the old dullard’s EC1V 3QJ in 2023? Christ.
Yup. Still boiling the pot.
Yup. Still boiling the pot.
Oh well, maybe when I’m thinking of retiring, I’ll be at the stage where I’m really keen on the flat… and they’ll have me a bit over a hundred miles east … where I hope they still won’t have taken up the sport of arguing about this.
On the other hand, it seems that the rest of the world are still keen to take their argument with them, and Dutch folks are quite happy not to back down if someone else starts an argument…
Welcome to the cycling club,
Welcome to the cycling club, Dan. Get well soon!
Is that in fact a souped up e-roller skate you’re riding???
Powered by solar panels me thinks….
The Sun have dashcam footage
The Sun have dashcam footage of the crash:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tv/21466140/moment-dan-walker-hit-by-car-bike-knocked-out/
It shows appalling road use by two drivers. The first undertakes Dan on the roundabout, preventing him moving over to the nearside lane if that was his exit. The second moving into his lane and ramming him from the rear. He wouldn’t have seen it coming and didn’t stand a chance.
£100 and three points FPN for the undertaking driver and a careless/dangerous driving charge for the driver who hit him – they need a ban and an extended re-test, at least 6 points and a hefty fine.
If the police don’t take any action based on this clear evidence, the system is broken.
HoarseMann wrote:
From the Granduia article (https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2023/feb/21/helmet-saved-my-life-says-dan-walker-after-bike-collided-with-car), it’s not clear what action the police are taking, but they consider it a “minor injury collision” and are not providing details. (That article is just as bad as the BBC’s one by the way).
In my view the message from this is that drivers must be patient on roundabouts and not attempt overtakes of cyclists.
hawkinspeter wrote:
So the police said the helmet saved his life but they also think it’s only a minor injury collision. Hmm, that doesn’t seem to equate.
And the Daily Heil have
And the Daily Heil have appeared with their usual victim blaming headline
“Dashcam captures moment Dan Walker was knocked out cold when the rear wheel of his bike caught car’s front wing”
I’m not going to link to that drivel
TriTaxMan wrote:
Should have had a mirror on it
TriTaxMan wrote:
Oh lordy, I looked. Even with that clear video evidence, most commenters are blaming the cyclist. Seems like a good proportion of DM readers need their driving licences revoked.
HoarseMann wrote:
I just won’t go down the route of looking at the comments in the DM as they will be a bin fire of victim blaming. I’ll just save myself that distress
HoarseMann wrote:
I threw myself into the circus/arena to have a quick gander and yes the comments regarding road craft were unreal. If not the surrender of their licenses, they need to at least sit a series of refresher courses.
Im not too bothered with the
Im not too bothered with the driver/car on the leftside on that kind of roundabout, even if theyve cut the lines, if Dan wanted to be in that left lane to exit, either youve got to indicate or be in that lane from the start, (theres an interesting roundabout video that both Ashley Neal and Blackbeltbarrister have covered about crossing lanes near exits Im surprised hasnt come up on here already). If youre on that right hand lane, youve got to hold position, and if you dont like being out there, then dont get in it in the first place.
the car that hit him, I dont know what they were playing at, they crossed the lanes ( back to dont cross lanes on an exit) didnt indicate they were doing anything, how did they not see him in front of them (albeit in that light in those conditions I wouldnt be wearing a black jacket – controversial opinion I know) but did they just assume he would veer left out of their way or were otherwise distracted ? at one point you think theyre going to the next exit. that should be a careless driving charge for the fact it involved injury that required hospital treatment.
as for was knocked out for 25mins, thats a serious concussion, should result in mri scan to check for bleeds on the brain, yeah I imagine he’s gone wow without my helmet that would have been worse…but not going to enter into that debate.
but theres no f*****g way Id be cycling on that roundabout.
Awavey wrote:
To me it seems to be a very poor move to undertake a cyclist like that. I take BBB or AN’s opinion’s with a pinch of salt, they both seem a bit wide of the mark sometimes.
I also wonder where that undertaking car came from? To me, it looks like the driver might have used the left-turn lane to go straight ahead, if so, that is inconsiderate driving at the very least. From the images in The Sun, could this be the same vehicle?:
they havent reviewed this yet
they havent reviewed this yet, though Im sure they will, it was just theyd highlighted something few weeks back which I think we do more as cyclists than drivers from a nearmiss at a multilane roundabout, which is crossing into a lane to take an exit because that line is easier to ride than adopting the lane immediately entering the roundabout and following it all the way around.
And its really that exact issue here, the driver that hit Dan is crossing a lane to take an exit, because it was the easier (quicker?) line to drive, whereas had they adopted the lane they wanted immediately on entering the roundabout, theyd end up square behind Dan and might then have paid more attention to him.
Awavey wrote:
I don’t think it’s necessarily done deliberately for their convenience – I think on larger multi-lane roundabouts like this, a lot of people struggle to follow the correct lane from entry all the way to exit. I used to regularly drive around Hanger Lane gyratory. For the route I took, there were two possible lanes on entry, which then split so that there were three possible lanes you could use for my desired exit (and six lanes in total at that point). I am sure I got it wrong myself on occasion, but I had a number of near misses with people barrelling around there and merging into my lane apparently without even knowing they had done so.
Awavey wrote:
Looking at Dan’s position entering the roundabout, I think he’s intending to turn right onto the ring road, not continue ahead as the undertaking vehicle did. If that’s the case, he is in the leftmost lane for his exit. You could argue he should be indicating right there to show he’s continuing around, but it wouldn’t have made any difference to the collision occurring.
As for the roundabout, I’ve negotiated worse. At least the speed limit here is 40mph, many multi-lane roundabouts are 70mph and drivers don’t seem to want to slow down for a cyclist. I think my preference would still be to use the cycle subway, but if I was running late for the train, I could be tempted to stick to the road as I’m sure it’s a lot quicker.
I wouldn’t want to drive on
I wouldn’t want to drive on that roundabout never mind cycle.
Wanted one of these (A) but
Wanted one of these (A) but didn’t even get something that would at least be safer for drivers (B) at what looks like a “high capacity” spot…
(Hint – if “capacity” is an issue on your inner ring road “more road for more vehicles” is not going to be your solution).
its not even the worst
its not even the worst roundabout in Sheffield is it ? theres one near the university, thats just like being the Griswolds trying to get off it
I wouldn’t know…apart from
I wouldn’t know…apart from a few hazy nights out there I don’t really know Sheffield
Then there are the
Then there are the roundabouts that aren’t really roundabouts, they are just really complicated ways of making a junction. Sheffield is one of those places where you can’t drive in it unless you’ve already driven there for 5 years to learn the roads. It should be compulsory for everyone to have a Groundhog Day experience and they don’t get out of that until they’ve driven the whole Sheffield network in the correct lane – which is unlikely ever to happen due to the heaps of cars parked just where you are supposed to be on most roads.
OK, I’ve had a nice cup of
OK, I’ve had a nice cup of tea after yesterday’s pile-on from Martin and Shutthefrontdawes.
I stand by my comment that a bike helmet is not comparable to a seatbelt or airbags (OK, ‘comparable’, as STFD wrote, because ‘they are similar in some ways’, but by that definition then so is having a roll of bubblewrap strapped to my back).
Airbags and seatbelts are tested to a standard and intended to definitely protect or even save the driver or passenger of a car in the event of a car crash; the standard for a bike helmet is to protect or even save you in the event of a fall onto a flat surface from about head height.
I have never encouraged people not to wear a helmet, nor have I said that a helmet will not protect you from any injuries.
I have never implied that anyone wearing a helmet is foolish or deluding themselves (saying that someone admitting to having no memory of a crash but then insisting that their helmet saved their life seems odd, is not at all the same thing).
I wear a helmet. I agree that it might protect me from some injuries in the event of my coming off my bike, but I also do not believe that it would save my life if I was run over by someone driving a car.
I think I need to take a break now.
Oh good lord! Why even light
Oh good lord! Yes, but why even light the touchpaper?
chrisonatrike wrote:
I actually spat my tea out when I saw the picture. If I knew how to do the clap emoji on here you’d be getting one.
brooksby wrote:
The fact you say they’re not comparable but go on to compare them is hilarious. Was that irony by accident, or on purpose?
ShutTheFrontDawes wrote:
Comparable usually means “of equivalent quality, worthy of comparison”.
“Compare” can be used to note similarities or differences, so it’s possible to compare anything with anything else.
hawkinspeter wrote:
I suppose it depends on what dictionary you use, but mine (Collins) has “can reasonably be compared”.
The fact that Brooksby has compared helmets and seatbelts/airbags numerous times (it gets funnier each time by the way) tells me that yes, they are comparable.
I never said they are the same. And I have been very patient, deliberate and specific about the ways the two things are alike and different. So I don’t think anyone can accuse me of suggesting that the two things are “of equivalent quality”; nor Martin for that matter. And we seem to disagree on far more than we agree on, so I give him credit there.
brooksby wrote:
Neither of them has anything positive to contribute, it seems, it’s just noise.
My mother mentioned this incident when I rang her last night and her comment was “he said his helmet saved his life”. I tried to explain that he doesn’t actually know that and anyway they’re not designed for being hit by 2 tonnes of metal. Why doesn’t his tweet ask drivers to behave better? I told her that people hurt their head and even die falling off ladders etc but no-one tells people they ought to be wearing a helmet each time they touch a stepladder. There are many head injuries among car occupants but do they wear helmets? No, and no-one suggests they should. Is it time they did?
Perhaps the helmet did cushion Dan’s noggin… but we don’t know. Like you, I am 100% happy for people to wear a helmet, hi-viz etc if they feel it’s appropriate or necessary. I have 3 cycle helmets but I really don’t want to be scolded for not wearing one some of the time. It’s my call so those helmet compulsionistas can f**k right off.
Definitely the take home
Definitely the take home message is that drivers need to be more careful on roundabout around cyclists, but I wouldn’t blame Dan for not having the presence of mind to figure that out after a hit like that.
For me the take home message
For me the take home message is as usual:
– if you don’t build it they can’t come (because they’re afraid this will happen)
– if you don’t build it well they won’t bother to come (because everyone is sensible enough to see the “infra” is at best inconvenient – the brave ignore it and the rest don’t cycle).
And the flip side:
– if you build it for driving people will drive, and the amount of driving often increases to fill the available space. That’s not hard as motor vehicles are space-inefficient.
Meanwhile – lots of people cycling here and efficient traffic flow (impossible!):
(Ideally there would simply be less motor traffic – that would make a same-grade roundabout possible – that’s cheaper).
Simon E wrote:
One to protect your head, the next to protect your helmet – but what’s the 3rd one for?
chrisonatrike wrote:
One to protect your head, the next to protect your helmet – but what’s the 3rd one for?— Simon E
To sit on the coffee table with an MC Escher waterfall on top of course!
Simon E wrote:
Just for the record, I’ve never advocated for mandating helmet use, so if you’re putting me in that bucket, you’re the one that can f**k right off and get your facts straight.
All I’ve done is call out people who insinuate or outright claim that helmets don’t protect your head in a collision. They do.
“protect your head in a
“protect your head in a collision. They do.”
A very bold claim in face of the available evidence.
marmotte27 wrote:
What evidence is that then?
This is just one study that supports my statement:
The potential for cycle helmets to
prevent injury – a review of the
evidence;
D Hynd, R Cuerden, S Reid and S Adams which says that “Assuming that they are a good fit and worn correctly, cycle helmets should be effective at reducing the risk of head injury, in particular cranium fracture, scalp injury and intracranial (brain) injury.”
Please make it stop!
Please make it stop!
Well, Dan was taking a strong
Well, Dan was taking a strong position in a lane, as he was entitled. The undertaking car, well, he stayed in a lane and did not encroach on Dan, who at that point was content to follow his lane, so I am not going to get too excited, I have that around complex, multi-lane, multiple exit roundabouts. As long as lanes unravel correctly, then that’s what we do- these days most roundabouts have that, rather than expecting you to change lanes.
Dan was clearly in view of the offending car who was presumably just not seeing – as we can see from the video, Dan is highly visible, even in the distance of a wide angle parcelshelfstucktothewindowordanglingaroundcam. Sheer negligence. You can also see that aside from being flung to the ground, Dan was very nearly crushed under the wheels of the car. That was not a minor injury accident, that was a potentially fatal accident, and someone who is unconscious for 25 minutes has most likely suffered from a serious brain injury with the potential for long term effects.
No doubt not really a problem for the CPS as it clearly was a momentary lapse of concentration leading to a momentary misjudgement, so not the drivers fault, really.*
*Do I have to flag the sarcasm here?
Helmet function in that crash
Helmet function in that crash – protecting Dan’s head when he was clipped and fell to the ground.
Most likely cause of death having watched that crash, would be being crushed under the car, causing broken back, rib fractures, lung punctures, massive internal bleeding.
The reason Dan is not dead is that the car managed to stop in time – possibly also he was protected by his bike jamming under the front of the car. It is also noticeable that neither car is going particularly quickly, looks like a 5mph or less difference with the car that hit him. so I am guessing the car was doing 20mph or less. In this case the fall was probably little difference in impact as a cyclist hitting a pothole (or crossing a Sheffield tramline) and coming off.
The helmet did the job it was supposed to do, protecting a cyclist’s head when falling off a bike. The helmet would have made no difference if the motorist had failed to react, as it would not have protected Dan’s head from the crushing effect of a wheel or engine.