- Opinion
Should the Tour come back?

Add as a preferred source on Google
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
12 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
More Opinion
Latest Comments
@HarrogateSpa could be. With some Labour / other socialist types I think it's: a) a historic reaction to the toff and/or mill owner and their horse-enhanced status. So "we'll damn well have cars also". ("Fairness", I guess). b) (partly related) many working people rely on their vehicles for work (or to get there). So "we'll fight anything that looks like them taking our independence". Of course I think excellent arguments against motor traffic dependence could be made for most political persuasions - but unfortunately it also seems that those for the status quo can also.
@kingleo but according to some posters here aren't those terrible places marred by very high cyclist fatality numbers, dreadful driving conditions, rampant drug use and (inevitably) "communism"? ("non-countries" eh Nige?) One major difference, which perhaps doesn't get enough attention, is that in NL they went through a process of deciding what all streets and roads were primarily "for". Then re-designating and indeed redesigning them and re-engineering the network to "make it so". "Monofunctional roads/streets". That means that it's much clearer where cycle infra is *required*, and where less obvious measures will do. That *would* be a major change for the UK. Our process has been that motor traffic appeared on streets which used to be foot / horse / carriage / cycle. We then had to add footways as it became clear the motor traffic was a danger (also as drivers demanded "their" streets). Then as the traffic got bigger / faster / volumes increased those non-vehicle spaces shrank... So now we commonly have a "high street" which is 1) a "place" or destination (so people want to drive and park there, but then will walk about) 2) maybe also a residential location 3) a major through route. And everyone complaining "our streets are too narrow to accommodate cycling".
@Rendel Harris Hold out for a Halfords Apollo* at least. * I did once own one. I bought it in skinter days to replace a Rudge 3-speed that I found in a scrapyard. Guess which one lasted me 4 years and which one lasted me 4 months.
@Mr Blackbird isn't it "this pub survived two World Wars, but will be destroyed by this ludicrous, dangerous cycle lane, which nobody wants and which will only be used by illegal immigrants riding unlicensed electric motorbikes..." ?
@Mr Blackbird The report on this case is on page 19 of today's Times. Maybe the more right wing rags didn't bother at all? It was on the BBC News website yesterday, but was not featured on this morning's Breakfast News.
@Rendel Harris no no NO! Won't you think of blind pedestrians, who will be in danger of falling in, then being run over by the peloton, then drowning?! Not to mention people with limited mobility who might stumble in and then not be able to get out? Or just those walking around in a relaxed manner, not paying too much attention? No, what is needed is a dedicated area to support accessibility for all. We could call it a ... road! Those with sight impairment would doubtless be ok with that as they would be able to hear the motor vehicles (unlike those deadly silent cyclists). And they could get taxis also. In fact all those who *have to drive* could use it! Cyclists would have nothing to complain about, they could ride there if they don't get in the way of motor vehicles and come to a compete stop whenever they see a pedestrian looking like they might cross...
@HoarseMann I've probably given this too much thought, but alongside each of the bridges I was going to have little in and out ramps to allow cyclists to exit for the shops rather than be confined to a straight-through run.
@kingleo Just picture a lovely character pub with all the original internal features. Baskets of flowers hanging outside. It serves an excellent selection of real ales, craft ales, quality lagers and quality ciders. Todays menu includes a ploughman's lunch, seafood platter and a vast range of sandwich fillings ; all made using locally sourced foods. But wait! A new cycle lane has just been constructed in front of the pub. It is far too dangerous to cross and enter the pub. You turn around and trudge home. Stopping at Tesco to buy a 4 pack of Carling.
@Hollis Jones as Rendel said, the key difference here is there were two strong pieces of evidence distinguishing this from "we all *know* they were aware of the cyclist", one of them a human witness. Outside that it's simply "but the prosecution cannot prove they didn't notice..." and legally that must fail. Like a "he said, she said" but where one of the sides is absent, because they're dead.
12 thoughts on “Should the Tour come back?”
“As a Tour de France nut,
“As a Tour de France nut, would I like to see the race on a rotation back to the UK every 3-4 years?”
You’re building a strawman up so that you can knock it down. I’ve never heard that suggested.
It’s neither sought nor warranted.
A TdF trip across across the Channel, every 10 years or so, would be grand.
If it was here every few
If it was here every few years then it wouldn’t be special – so it won’t.
7 years since the last time ?
That seems about right. There are plenty of cities who want to pay for a tour visit in Europe.
Why is Utrecht offending you?
Why is Utrecht offending you? The tour has started outside of France six times in the last ten years – it’s almost a tradition of the modern tour and (as we saw this year) a great way of widening it’s appeal.
I think we should see it back here in the 2020’s and until then lot’s of other close by countries.
What’s wrong with a Utrecht
What’s wrong with a Utrecht start? The Dutch love cycling, it’s been only four years since the Rotterdam start anyway. I guess you’ve not been a “Tour de France nut” for very long otherwise you’d know that.
Nick T wrote:What’s wrong
A tad aggressive Nick 🙂
I am aware that the Tour regularly starts outside of France, but as I allude to in the piece, I feel that’s more for commercial reasons than for the benefit of the race.
Its my preference that the race is conducted in France. But that’s my preference based on my experiences watching the race (and since you ask, its 29 Tours!) . I just have a better feeling watching the race in France. Others may not, its a personal thing.
I do accept there are other viewpoints though. The most drama filled prologue was 1989 when Delgado missed his start (in Luxembourg), and the stage a lot of people highlight as the best win in modern times was Claudio Chiappucci in 1992 (to Sestrieres in Italy).
Doesn’t make my view right or wrong, just makes it my view.
Traditionally this year would
Traditionally this year would see the Tour start on French soil. Is Utrecht in France??
Traditionally this year would
Traditionally this year would see the Tour start on French soil. Is Utrecht in France??
Id rather see the TofB do as
Id rather see the TofB do as good a job, and have that instead.
They seem to be in a cycle
They seem to be in a cycle roughly of starting outside France every other year at the moment.
I’d like to see, maybe in five-eight years, a coordinated effort from the UK & Ireland. Bring the Tour, Giro, Vuelta starts AND the World Road Race championships here
The worlds I would like as
The worlds I would like as the multi discipline format is closer to the Olympic cycling we all enjoyed in 2012.
We have a recent winner and I think the public would get behind it.
jimmythecuckoo wrote:The
It’s multi-discipline as you say- and we have TWO recent winners at senior men’s level, one this year!
We would like to see it
We would like to see it coming to Edinburgh next time. Edinburgh does bike events 🙂