Tony Blackburn took to social media this weekend to report being “nearly knocked down by a cyclist” as he crossed the road outside the BBC’s New Broadcasting House premises in Manchester.
Replying to fellow BBC colleague Jeremy Vine, Blackburn said the “near miss” was “not good” and happened as he used a crossing, the cyclist apparently “didn’t bother to stop when I was half way across it”.
The reply came in response to Vine sharing another of his London cycling-related videos on Twitter, this time analysing a must get in front (MGIF) overtake from a van driver approaching a red light, before some heated arguing from the driver involved and the one following.
Vine speculated the driver is “probably a nice guy, and just needs to think a bit more about his fellow road users” but the “guy behind him in the van — not so much”.
With some relief, back to cycling.
This driver is probably a nice guy, and just needs to think a bit more about his fellow road users.
The guy behind him in the van — not so much. pic.twitter.com/l6FBjs8RQm— Jeremy Vine (@theJeremyVine) July 15, 2023
Since the broadcaster shared the video, Orkid Life, the “integrated facility management support service” provider whose branded van the driver is in, has been flooded with one-star Google reviews.
But, while the video has been viewed almost a million times, at the time of writing, in just the latest example of the social media attention Vine’s cycling posts garner, Blackburn responded with a reply about a near miss of his own.
“I don’t have video evidence but I have to report that on the crossing outside New Broadcasting house I was nearly knocked down by a cyclist yesterday as I was crossing, he didn’t bother to stop when I was half way across it. A near miss, not good,” the veteran radio personality said.
Vine responded to his BBC colleague: “Thank God you are ok. Best wishes.”
Detective Chief Superintendent Andy Cox, a leading figure in road safety, also joined the conversation around Vine’s video, saying: “Imagine doing this in a queue at the cinema or supermarket… You wouldn’t do it right?! So why do impatient drivers do so? It’s rude, increases danger, and at best you will save just a few seconds. Essentially zero gain to look very silly, obnoxious and put others at risk.”
In May, Blackburn called for RideLondon to be replaced by an “event for car owners” – because “there are more of us and we pay to go on the roads” only to insist two days later that the “joke” was not a serious suggestion.
“This idea of a car day in London was meant to be a joke but people didn’t seem to get that I was joking,” he said. “Obviously a car day in London would bring everything to a halt.”
Hi Tony, A drawing you might enjoy. pic.twitter.com/X2QcrCcXJV
— Dave Walker (@davewalker) May 28, 2023
104 thoughts on “Tony Blackburn responds to latest Jeremy Vine cycling video, says he was “nearly knocked down by a cyclist” while using crossing”
Didn’t New Broadcasting House
Didn’t New Broadcasting House in Manchester get demolished about a decade ago ?
It is new to someone who has
It is new to someone who has been in the old one for how many years of his career. Of course we don’t have the full details of the Tony Blackburn incident, but as this seems to be the only crossing near Broadcasting House, isn’t halfway across him standing on the central refuge, with the cycling lanes being as far from him as possible?
But it says Manchester in the
But it says Manchester in the article ?
and this was New Broadcasting House on Oxford Road, where Mark & Lard did their breakfast show from https://goo.gl/maps/fHinPDfj8rzKDti58
but it was knocked down about ten years ago when the Beeb moved out to Salford Quays Media City.
Yes, that is Road.cc typing
Yes, that is Road.cc typing in “new broadcasting house BBC” and getting that wrong address. He does Radio 2 which is broadcast from London. I can’t see him “slumming it” outside of the Capital once he stopped pirating.
If that is the crossing in
If that is the crossing in question, I believe that technically a crossing with a central refuge like that is treated as two separate crossings (Rule 20), so depending on what he means by “halfway across”, there may have been no requirement for a cyclist (or any other vehicle driver) to stop for him.
Doubt it, Blackburn’s not a
Doubt it, Blackburn’s not a fool, he’d know that either side of the refuge is treated as individual crossings. You don’t start crossing Portland Place and expect drivers all the way across the other side of the road to stop for you.
Clearly, a bad cyclist has zipped around him as he was still on the black and white stuff. Certainly more cyclists than drivers do, same with red lights..
Vo2Maxi wrote:
I suspect that is only because cyclists can fit, and can (in theory, of course) safely go around someone. A car wouldn’t fit and would just go over them, so (generally) waits.
I see motorists drive over zebra crossings the moment that a pedestrian is not directly in front of them, but is still on the crossing, every day.
‘I see motorists drive over
‘I see motorists drive over zebra crossings the moment that a pedestrian is not directly in front of them, but is still on the crossing, every day’.. which is legal, but if a pedestrian has to stop or otherwise get out of the way, then the motorist or cyclist has failed to give way and committed an offence.
grOg wrote:
Horlicks! If the pedestrian is still on the crossing then they are using the crossing and the motorist/cyclist/scooterist/horsist should wait until they have finished using the crossing.
In the UK, anyway (I don’t know what the rules are in Australia).
I am somewhat puzzled as to
I am somewhat puzzled as to why we should give a toss about this person’s opinion.
I note that his show is on at
I note that his show is on at 7pm on Fridays. This was about the time I burnt my mouth on a takeaway. I’d like to take to social media to highlight this hazard and link it to Tony Blackburn.
You might also, similarly
You might also, similarly take to social media over Vine.
Because he’s in the majority
Because he’s in the majority and if you don’t listen that makes you arrogant. Not only that, he is quite right to mention being endangered on a crossing.
If all you ever do is whine about nasty motorists without recognising the actions of bad cyclists, that makes you bigoted and entitled.
And it does the valid arguments about cyclists being at far more risk than drivers, no good at all when you make everyone on four wheels hate you.
Of course, we should take his
Of course, we should take his claim verbatim and without any scrutiny.
How do you know he is in the majority, unless by majority you mean irrational dislike of cyclists.
Ffs!
Ffs!
The poor man.
Just for shits and giggles, I come close to being taken out by a motorist at least once during every trip I make, which can be 10 or more times daily. Then of course there are the actual times when the buffoon behind the wheel actually does make contact followed by a cheeky SMIDSY, or just blatant ignorance and if I’m really unlucky being flung headlong over the handlebars, yet this old dodderer wants to highlight the odd errant cyclist.
Nice one Tony ?
Well at least he’s stopped a
Well at least he’s stopped a whimpering and a whining about Tessa Wyatt at long last.
yet this old dodderer wants
yet this old dodderer wants to highlight the odd errant cyclist
I follow the example of the police over this alleged incident: no video = it didn’t happen, therefore case closed. Lancashire Constabulary has taken this principle further: even if there is video, in cases where a cyclist is the complainant, the video must be confirmed by video from the offending vehicle. If there isn’t any = case closed. This was the statement of the laughable response to my complaint about the lack of action over this offence:
https://upride.cc/incident/md68fwc_apcovernight_whitelinecross/
Imagine this was a while ago,
Imagine this was a while ago, so NIP no use now. At the very least you should write to the local councillor in Garstang and the MP and request that they ask the police why they considered this not worthy of any further action. Seems totally unjustified. It’s a small town with some measure of civic pride and I can’t believe the police are too busy around there to deal with this. No crime ever happens in Garstang.
.
You’re delusional if you
You’re delusional if you think more drivers pro rata jump lights and crossings than cyclists. It’s the other way around. And yes, I’m a cyclist, have been for over 40 years.
But certainly if you do it in a car you are far more likely to hurt or kill someone.
Not accepting there are bad cyclists, does the cause no good.
There’s a couple of examples
There’s a couple of examples of really stupid behaviour here.
1. Driving like a knob in a fully liveried van that has employer’s contact details all over it.
2. Continue to drive in this manner and conduct a sweary argument with somebody that is wearing cameras, has national TV and radio shows broadcast daily, a large social media following and is known for producing the occasional video when sawn off by other road users while riding a bike.
.
LOL! Well put.
.
.
LOL! Well put.
.
Extreme example – I was
Extreme example – I was crossing a pedestrian crossing in London some time back (ironically round the corner from brompton junction having looked at brompton bikes) the crossing was ram packed with pedestrians and green to pedestrians. A cyclists decided to simply ride through everyone.
It is almost as though the vehicle doesn’t matter and ultimately you get twats in cars and also twats on bikes. Who’d a thunk it??
.
.
Yeah, but. No, but.
.
No twats on bikes on this site.
.
EVER.
.
You stating you don’t ride a
You stating you don’t ride a bike?
He should call 998, they’re
He should call 998, they’re nearly the police. It would be interesting to know if the cyclist passed in front of or behind him; according to the Metropolitan police, in response to the famous clash between a cyclist and a pedestrian on the crossing just outside Parliament, it is permissible for a cyclist to pass behind a pedestrian on a zebra crossing but not in front of them. I’ve never been quite sure where they get that guidance from though and I prefer to wait until the pedestrian is all the way across to ensure nobody gets upset.
I’ve found its a thing that
I’ve found its a thing that motorists like to reply with when I regale them with stories of one of a number of occurences where I am close passed, cut up, turned in front of, left-hooked etc.
“Ah, well, there was this one time when I saw a cyclist go through a red light…”
There’s no mention of Mr
There’s no mention of Mr Blackburn wearing hi viz and having working lights so how would the cyclist have seen him?
He was joking.
He was joking.
Tony is very fortunate Chris
Tony is very fortunate Chris Feather is head of programmes.
Anti-social cyclists? Book
Anti-social cyclists? Book ’em, especially “professionals” – and chase their “not really employers honest” delivery companies. Same as for those on mopeds / in cars.
BUT … we’ll be needing suitably trained police, given that most have zero idea of cycling. So they all get a course – call it a road safety refresher. Ideally with practical experience although for money it’ll no doubt be 30 minutes on Zoom or Teams. Still that would be an improvement for some (Polis Scotland, Lancs etc.)
Or – for those who point out that it’s just people (who are more or less considerate), or who are skeptical of authority – there’s the practical “let’s fix it for all to just get along” / “let’s share the space but properly (not UK style)” method. Although I don’t think it’s what most have in mind…
Are those specially trained
Are those specially trained police in addition to all the other specially trained police we need?
Policing twitter
Policing LGBT marches in armbands and tutus
Policing unconscious bias
Policing…well I’m sure someone looked at me funny and I felt threatened…
Why shouldn’t Police look
Why shouldn’t Police look into Hate crimes? Are they not seen as crimes by you?
I nearly listened to a Tony
I nearly listened to a Tony Blackburn radio programme.
NEVER AGAIN.
‘Detective Chief
‘Detective Chief Superintendent Andy Cox, a leading figure in road safety, also joined the conversation around Vine’s video, saying: “Imagine doing this in a queue at the cinema or supermarket… You wouldn’t do it right?! So why do impatient drivers do so? It’s rude, increases danger, and at best you will save just a few seconds. Essentially zero gain to look very silly, obnoxious and put others at risk.”
exactly the point. But somehow so many van drivers and taxi drivers don’t get it. I’m sure it’s because they listen to certain radio stations whilst sat in traffic all day. Radio stations that agitate and over excite their pea brains.
In many instances it’s
In many instances it’s because the drivers of commercial vehicles are either on job and knock so rush around to finish early or they are given more work than is realistic on today’s busy roads and so rush around to get home at a sensible time. Either way, not safe for other road users.
Vine just comes across as a
Vine just comes across as a woke smartarse, intent on lecturing people and actually, forcing other roadusers around him to bend to his will. He’s the cycling version of the guy who sits in the RH lane of a motorway at exactly 70mph, not overtaking and not letting anyone pass. I find him infuriating and I’m a cyclist of over 40yrs (BCF life member, racing high level, commuting etc), as well as a driver all that time. 90% of what Vine does just winds people up.
Yes you fool, everyone knows there’s a red light ahead and he’ll just get stuck there same as you, but “taking the lane”unnecessarily (he takes it to the extreme) just blocks other roadusers and causes anger, a large contributor to accidents. Plus al the bile I get on account of him.
Vo2Maxi wrote:
So in other words you don’t like people who abide by the law of the land, and believe that they should get out of the way of people who don’t want to do so?
That’s not what I said, it’s
That’s not what I said, it’s not what I meant, and that’s not the way it is.
Vine persistently blocks people from even passing legally, and then shows off about it on social media.
Moreover, although I’d never stand up for a driver who DID break the law, Vine’s entitled attitude encourages them to.
Vo2Maxi wrote:
You said you find Vine infuriating as he’s exactly like the people who drive at 70mph and won’t let anyone pass. Ergo you think people who stick to the law and prevent other people from breaking it are infuriating. It’s exactly what you said.
The law says you keep to the
The law says you keep to the left unless overtaking.
There are occasions when “taking primary” is appropriate, and that normally happens naturally when you’re on a bike and you keep the kerb and any obstructions, a safe distance from you on your left.
If you need to move out then a clear signal well in advance does the trick, look over shoulder and merge into traffic on your right.
NOT habitually riding down the middle of the road to make a point and pee people off unnecessarily.
Vo2Maxi wrote:
Ummm…shome mishtake?
Vo2Maxi wrote:
Woke? Today I learned that taking primary (which pisses off drivers who desperately need to reach the red light queue) is recognising the racism inherent in our system.
Pretty sure you’re the guy
Pretty sure you’re the guy who called me a racist recently. Grow up. Calling people names instead of engaging their argument makes you look foolish.
Vo2Maxi wrote:
You don’t have a coherent argument, you’re just ranting.
Can you remind me of why I apparently called you a racist? Was it because you were being racist?
I have plenty of arguments,
I have plenty of arguments, none of which you’ve actually addressed, because you seem to be an entitled brat. Didn’t your mum ever say “no” to you at the checkout when you were screaming for chocolate?
Re: the racism thing, from memory you were the guy who compared cyclists’ issues with racism, which is frankly gormless.
Vo2Maxi wrote:
I think you’re just getting confused as that doesn’t ring any bells with me.
So, as you have lots of well reasoned arguments, I’m sure you were able to discuss why your comments weren’t racist and that lots of people agreed with your logic.
I assume that you’re projecting (a common right-wing failing) about being a brat – certainly your comments here don’t speak of a mature and deep understanding of the issues.
Again, you are deflecting.
Again, you are deflecting. You still haven’t addressed ANY of my points. That’s frankly pathetic.
Now I’m right wing apparently ?. You total fool. By sticking people in little boxes it makes it simple to hate them, rather than actually have a debate. You are everything that’s going wrong with this country. You will realise when it’s all a bit too late, but you’ll still blame others because you and your echo chamber mates will be crying in your designer beer together.
This is about commonsense, something which you seem to have none of. “Young idealist” is great, but ADD to the debate, don’t sit in your little corner whining and annoying everyone.
Oh don’t get me started with
Oh don’t get me started with these lefties and their designer beer. They put nutmeg in it you know, apparently it makes them “high” (or is it coriander? not sure). And they all wear flip flops all the time. I blame the laybah council. Not one in particular, they are all pretty much the same.
I didn’t say that, YOU did.
I didn’t say that, YOU did. By the way, I like real ale. So there. IPA in particular, and I was drinking it long before it got trendy.
Vo2Maxi wrote:
I guess you’d know…
Nah, look at your echo
Nah, look at your echo chamber mates’ replies, and see who immediately took that stance.
…when you say “taking
…when you say “taking primary”, in your case does that mean you’re at primary school?
Vo2Maxi wrote:
If I were a primary school kid, then shouldn’t you be feeling embarrassed that a kid can make fun of you for not understanding the meaning of the word “woke”?
Ah, woke = racism.
Ah, woke = racism.
?
Even if it specifically did, why use it for road issues? Feeling left out are you? Because you see someone else getting all the sympathy?
See how far you get with that.
No-one will be pushing over statues for you any time soon
Vo2Maxi wrote:
Specifically, “woke” is being aware of systemic racism (as well as social injustice), so I think you’ve got yourself a bit confused.
By the way, have you realised yet that we’re laughing at you and your incoherent, yet angry ranting?
Time for a squirrel ?️
Time for a squirrel ?️ picture.
Hirsute wrote:
Iconic.
Iconic.
You lost me with woke.
You lost me with woke.
Look it up, it’s even in a
Look it up, it’s even in a dictionary now.
I’m confused, caring about
I’m confused, caring about injustice is a bad thing now? Must be that dubious education I had leading to poorly paying job.
If someone blasts past me
If someone blasts past me unnecessarily while I’m on my bike, I’ll smile sweetly and wink at them as we both wait for green. And if they’ve done it dangerously I’ll take them to task over it.
But all this lecturing rubbish does no one any good. It just creates tribalism which is corrosive.
Vo2Maxi wrote:
How do you “take them to task” if not by “lecturing” them?
Keen to know, as I would love a way of remonstrating with dangerous passers that works.
You’re another one who can’t
You’re another one who can’t read.
This is about UNNECESSARILY LECTURING PEOPLE.
Vine is riding down the road, imposing his will on other roadusers. My comment about drivers sitting in the RH lane on a motorway sums it up perfectly.
Yes of course, AS I HAVE SAID, if someone cuts me up or endangers me, I will shout at them. Just as I’ll shout at a cyclist who rides across me as I walk across a pedestrian crossing.
The sooner *some of the entitled idiots* (not all) on these boards and elsewhere put their hands up to bad behaviour from *some* cyclists, the quicker they’ll be seen as credibly defending their rights.
The fact that some on here are conflating their road experiences with “racism” says it all.
Vo2Maxi wrote:
Ooooh – breaking out the CAPITALS now. Are you getting shouty?
Incidentally, I believe you brought up the whole racism topic by your use of the word “woke” – I expect you actually meant to use a different expression, but you don’t seem to be able to express yourself very well.
Well, because you’re a bit
Well, because you’re a bit thick?
And woke isn’t just about
And woke isn’t just about racism. Is it? Is it?
It’s a delusional mindset which has far outstripped a desire for rights, be that on the road or anywhere else, it’s become a constant drone of brattish entitlement .
Vo2Maxi wrote:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/woke-meaning-origin#:~:text=Woke%20is%20now%20defined%20in,the%20Black%20Lives%20Matter%20movement.
Especially. Not exclusively.
Especially. Not exclusively. And this has now been “rolled out” to cover other so called causes. You even see it in this thread, with the cyclist’s plight being directly compared with racism. QED I believe?
The problem is, when you politicise issues unnecessarily, you immediately turn off a lot of potential sympathisers. Road safety isn’t politics. And it goes both ways, you want people to respect YOU on the road, therefore you must extend the same courtesy.
Perfect case in point here, a cyclist has illegally and potentially dangerously crossed in front of Blackburn’s path on a crossing, yet I don’t think there’s even one person empathising with him?
When you do that you’ve instantly lost the argument.
A lot of people need to grow up I think.
Vo2Maxi wrote:
To be fair, what we have is “Blackburn says that a cyclist has illegally and potentially dangerously crossed in front of his path on a crossing”.
Apologies – I clearly can’t
Apologies – I clearly can’t read. I thought you were saying that lecturing does no one any good. I took that to mean you had devised some other means of conveying your message to people.
You’ll note I didn’t say “dangerous drivers” as just yesterday road.cc had a story of a dangerous pass by a group of cyclists.
You shout at someone who cuts you up or endangers you, but you know if won’t do any good. Is it a cathartic exercise for you?
Depends on your definition of
Depends on your definition of lecturing. I’ve clearly specified my definition, which is unnecessarily enforcing your will on other roadusers for no other reason than to “teach them a lesson”. That’s what Vine does. Maybe you too?
I’ve also said I stick up for myself when I’ve actually been endangered, or I see dangerous driving. People who aren’t naturally inclined to sympathise with cyclists, or simply “don’t understand” because they don’t ride a bike, are far more likely to sympathise with that, than being stick behind someone riding down the middle of the road for apparently no good reason.
ahhh I think I get it now.
ahhh I think I get it now.
You can lecture another road user if its necessary. If you think a driver has endangered you, for instance.
But what if you ride primary
But what if you ride primary at a pinch point to try and stop a dangerous overtake but they think you are riding in the middle of the road for no reason?
I’m sure the conversation will go well as we have seen so many times before.
Reminds of the Merc driver at the beginning of the month who told me the close pass was ok because she didn’t hit me.
I am rewatching the video,
I am rewatching the video, attempting to put myself into the same position.
Cycling alongside a bus. Van close passes me (I would have submitted that to OpSnap as none of the van wheels appear to cross out of the lane, despite the outer lane being clear) then the van pulls in in front of me and crosses into the lane I might have tried to use to avoid him – although I would have been very aware of the massive bus that was in that lane just seconds before.
Yeah – I wouldn’t have felt safe in that situation, but I have said before I am not a confident cyclist.
If Vine hadn’t been riding
If Vine hadn’t been riding unnecessarily alongside the bus, making a point, blocking any attempts to pass the bus then he wouldn’t have increased his chance of being inappropriately overtaken.
Now you will call that victim blaming or gaslighting, I’d call it common bloody sense.
The van driver is being a twat making his point, just like Vine.
Anyway, have you given your opinion on Blackburn’s crossing experience yet?
Vo2Maxi wrote:
Ahhh – okay. I’m slowly getting there. Cyclists aren’t allowed to overtake a bus. They are also not allowed to attempt to keep themselves safe by discouraging someone from attempting to squeeze past them, while overtaking a bus. Wait – is that all cyclists or just in London?
No – I wouldn’t call that victim blaming or gaslighting. I’m not entirely sure what gaslighting is. I feel I spend a lot of time on here looking up phrases and abbreviations to gain some understanding. I struggle with the nuances of internet commenting. For instance – Mr Blackburn has previously made a comment that he then said was a joke, so I am unsure when he is being serious or not. I didn’t get the punchline the first time round, so I am waiting to see if there is a punchline with this comment.
Happy to make comment on road users illegally crossing zebra crossings and putting pedestrians at risk, if that is okay? It is illegal as soon as a pedestrian foot touches the crossing. It is rude to continue when a pedestrian indicates their intention to use the crossing, but, as when in a car, there is not always sufficient stopping distance when a pedestrian first moves towards a crossing.
Vehicle operators have to
Vehicle operators have to give way to a pedestrian using a pedestrian crossing, but it’s not illegal to go across a crossing as soon as a pedestrian foot touches a crossing.
grOg wrote:
One of those nuances of internet commenting I am still getting to grips with. I meant in the UK it is illegal as soon as a pedestrian foot touches the crossing, which is my interpretation of Highway Code Rule 195:
(I have put the relevant line in bold)
Vo2Maxi wrote:
He wasn’t, he had pulled into the right-hand lane knowing that the bus was coming up to a bus stop (which you can clearly see on the road on the left before the lights) and slowing down and so overtaking it, a perfectly legitimate manoeuvre. Or are cyclists supposed to follow behind buses without changing lanes and stop and wait for them to embark and disembark passengers?
Rendel Harris wrote:
This is The Way
Vo2Maxi wrote:
Ah, so overtaking a bus (even if it’s pulling into a bus stop) is unnecesary
Isn’t this unnecesarily driving alongside the bus? or is it necesary as soon as someone has a motor? MGIF
Yes. When do you then?
Yes. When do you then?
Vo2Maxi wrote:
When do I lecture dangerous road users? When you think they have endangered you.
Vo2Maxi wrote:
Generally I follow this pattern out of desire not to make my day worse. Turning the other cheek can save you further beating. However if you want people to stop hitting you another part to your strategy is needed. Or just develop a very tough face and hope not to encounter a Tyson…
Sounds like splitting definitions here. “take them to task” vs. “lecturing”?
On the other hand you say “creates tribalism”; I say a more realistic explanation for such behaviour is “indifferent, incompetent or irrascible people behind the wheel”. How do you explain how a tiny minority “creates tribalism”? There is a very common trope (throughout history) where the powerful majority – when challenged – start decrying it as provocation or claim they’re being oppressed by the lesser party. Are you sure you haven’t fallen for a version of that narrative?
It’s not like “the cycling mafia” control the media now, is it? Yes – there’s the odd (and he is) loud exception (basically Mr. Vine). But after that we’re down to those media titans who no-one’s heard of like Carton Reid, Pete Walker, Laura Laker…
(Yes – for comedy value you could invoke Boris Johnson I guess – but I haven’t read anything about cycling by him for a looong time.)
As I have explained, I don’t
As I have explained, I don’t turn the other cheek. I stick up for myself. WHEN APPLICABLE. Constantly whining and “making your point” is a pain in the bum. Even reasonable people will end up disliking you for it.
As for the MSM, the BBC give a very fair crack of the whip with guys like Tom Heap and Justin Rowlatt. They are in no way in the pockets of “big oil” or the motoring lobby. Far from it. If you think otherwise, maybe you’re the extreme one?
Vo2Maxi wrote:
It sounds like Mr. Vine has well and truly got up your bibshorts. I can see how he can be irritating but don’t give him the satisfaction.
It’s a tricky one … particularly because in the motor vehicle vs. cycling case it often really is “your convenience” (or merely “you paying a modicum of attention and obeying the law”) vs. my life. And for most people because they don’t cycle they literally don’t see any problems. In fact, they rarely see a cyclist! So naturally in conversations it can sound like some entitled minority is getting all weirdly shouty and unreasonable – about what exactly? (I’ve a strange sense of deja-type at this point…)
EDIT … which is why I think it’s best to concentrate on reducing the physical space “conflict” via proper separate infra. And focus on “both safety AND convenience” – the latter tends to get lost for non-motoring modes whereas it’s even more important). But then I think that more people cycling would be a good thing – not everyone has that view!
Of course sticking up for yourself with someone who has just demonstrated they don’t give a stuff about your safety, and who may now be angry (no-one likes to be challenged) and is armed with a deadly metal exoskeleton and the benefit of the doubt from the law… also not a good place.
Just waiting for our “BBC cycling coverage fairness” correspondant, eburtthebike, on this one…
I totally agree on the
I totally agree on the infrastructure thing. But it’s tricky, and expensive, and money is tight. And difficult in cities which are cramped, with narrow roads which go back 100s years. I wish we could be like the Netherlands. We’ll get there, bit by bit.
I have skin in the game, I lost three good cycling mates to bad and dangerous driving over the years: Simon Hook, Chris Negus, Zak Carr. I think of them most days I ride a bike. All had young families, there were no prosecutions in any of those cases despite perpetrators being identified.
As an aside, regarding the cycling infrastructure thing, responsibility also comes with rights? I was riding in Flanders a couple of years ago, out watching the E3 Harelbeke and Gent-Wevelgem. I was happily riding along one not very busy B road in between vantage points, and I received a torrent of abuse from two passing drivers. I hadn’t held them up at all. I spoke to a local over a beer later, and he said because there was a separate cycle track next to the road, I’m expected to use it. I saw the road as making faster progress, plus my right to be there. It hadn’t occurred to me that I “must” use the available track. It cuts both ways.
Vo2Maxi wrote:
Our streets are too narrow, we have historic towns, cycling is not a good fit for cities, infra is expensive.
It took a few decades (many years ago) to completely overcome all those limitations for motor traffic. But see how well it’s been done! So yes, it takes time and money but it clearly can be done. It’s not at all easy but it is just about choices and priorities. This change didn’t happen “by itself”. Politicians very heavily backed the motoring horse (as it were) over the years – to the detriment of all other modes.
Sorry to hear that. Mostly we get home safe. But when we don’t that can have consequences beyond ourselves.
Yes. However I’m not worried that I can’t cycle on motorways. I’ll effectively not cycle on some sections of A-road (only use if it would otherwise mean x mile detour where x is large). Nor do I habitually cycle on footways.
So I’m already not entirely “free”. Feels fine – other anarchists may vary of course.
Perhaps David Hembrow’s articles on “speed” may be of interest here. On “but we’ll be confined to rubbish cycle paths“. Well… aside from the fact that most in the UK don’t cycle at all for many who do now cycle they are *already* confined to crap cycle infra. Because they simply don’t feel safe cycling with the motor vehicles.
“Critical mass” for
“Critical mass” for meaningful change in the UK road infrastructure probably isn’t too far off? With more and more on bikes, change must come. I wince every time I read about another cyclist death in London, and it’s frequently young women being cut across by huge lorries turning left on them.
I’m confident on the road, many aren’t, it’s not their “fault”, it’s reality. So yes, we need change.
Vo2Maxi wrote:
I envy your confidence. I’d say “maybe a couple of generations?” If other countries are a guide I suspect that “crossing the tipping point and gaining momentum” also looks like “slightly less glacial change, sometimes with reverses”.
I just happen to think mass cycling could bring access to a number of virtuous circles. Even so it’s clearly not hugely stable against people wanting to go down other paths. Wild speculation now but I suspect that’s because of some of the things I like about it e.g. bicycles and related infra are simple, very well understood and mature technologies. Cycling is – comparatively – not resource intensive and less centralising than e.g. motor vehicles. Lots of the “benefits” of cycling are distributed e.g. people who didn’t pay for a bike / cycle infra and/or don’t cycle also get some benefits. Some benefits come in terms of “savings” (health, less noise, public space usage or pollution than alternatives) or are hard to monetise (well-being, independent mobility).
Putting some of those qualities together may be a turn-off for business, politicians and legislators I suspect – because you / your allies / your party / your company needs to have control of distribution of the benefits. Getting big sums of cash, “disruption” e.g. rapid growth, cornering the market, finding USPs, rapid turnover of products etc. seem more difficult. Of course – combine a bike with a motor / computer / electronics and you can make some of those work.
Confidence is good, competence is good. Neither kept Michael Mason alive (insert other fatal crash victims here). Have enough drivers interacting with people not in cars (or large / well-signed buildings [1] [2]…) and some will just hit them, because humans.
The main issue is that most people do not cycle and most trips are not cycled. Lots of reasons, but “doesn’t feel safe” (despite it being objectively safe) is definitely one.
I wonder if Vine posts up the
I wonder if Vine posts up the occasions when he’s “taken the lane out of principle” and blocked other roadusers, and then before he gets there the light goes green and they could have got through but for him? No, of course not. It’s selective reporting, a sense of entitlement and “I’m always right”, which is a similar attitude to many BBC journalists and news producers. How unsurprising.
I ride to the left according to conditions, not in the gutter I might add, I anticipate when I’ll want to move out and I’ll signal, look, and do so. I ride assertively. 99% of drivers respect that and it works for me.
It could work for Vine if he wasn’t virtue-signalling all the time.
So you don’t like Jeremy Vine
So you don’t like Jeremy Vine. Got that.
What do you think of Sadiq Khan and Cycling Mikey?
Well. Who would have though
Well. Who would have though veteran DJ and failed pop singer Tony Blackburn would have started such a heated debate
And why would he?
And why would he?
Pray, tell?
I imagine in his life he has achieved far, far more than you or I ever will. He’s an iconic broadcaster and been that for 60 years or so, still going.
He’s not a “hater” as far as I’m aware, unless you have evidence to the contrary?
Why would he what? What are
Why would he what? What are we talking about again?
You said:
You said:
“Well. Who would have though veteran DJ and failed pop singer Tony Blackburn would have started such a heated debate”.
Seems pointed, no?
Correct me if I am wrong.
I only came on here because I
I only came on here because I felt left out with you shouting at everyone else. You’re not cross with me are you?
Did I say that? I don’t
Did I say that? I don’t remember saying that. Are you sure?
Vo2Maxi wrote:
That doesn’t stop him being a dickhead or making ill-informed comments.
We’ve had plenty of idiotic stuff from TV, acting and sporting celebs over the years and that’s before we even start on the famous wife-beaters, paedos and so on… Jimmy Saville ‘achieved’ far more than I ever will* but he’s not someone I could ever respect or admire.
* though it also depends on how you measure success
And he was never iconic. Just
And he was never iconic. Just because you get old it doesn’t give you icon status.
Jeremy Vine in yet another
Jeremy Vine in yet another ‘event’. Has he ever thought about getting some training? I’m reminded of the advice to ‘make an event, a non-event’. He seems to take the opposite……
The advice to ignore drivers
The advice to ignore drivers who endanger cyclists and pretend these are “non-events” is of couse a very popular one with those very drivers who want to preserve the motor-centric status quo.