We’re struggling to see what the story is – but in Scunthorpe a slow-moving cyclist pedalling up a long hill has made the papers after he allegedly held up 100 vehicles.
According to the Scunthorpe Telegraph, the rider “left the Tata Steel works at the Anchor exit and then, perfectly legally, began the long haul up the hill – in the middle of the only available lane,” due to the council closing off the second lane with cones.
Councillor Nigel Sherwood (Brigg & Wolds), said: "It has already been flagged up," he said. "A cyclist in one lane biked all the way up Mortal Ash in the 'live' lane and there was no room for cars – 100 vehicles being behind him.
"It's something we need to look at and try and address."
He did stress that the cyclist had done nothing wrong and wondered whether he might have used the footpath instead.
"We need give and take on both sides. Help each other if you can," he suggested.
“A considerate early morning cyclist – holding up traffic between Forest Pines roundabout and the top of Mortal Ash Hill on his way towards Scunthorpe – pulled over to the right, into the coned off area, to let traffic go by."
Would a tractor or milk float have made the morning papers? You decide.




-1024x680.jpg)


















57 thoughts on “Cyclist doing something legal in Scunthorpe makes the local paper”
Sounds very much like the
Sounds very much like the local Councillor is condoning illegal riding on the pavement. Wonder if he would be quite so keen if residents complained about pavement cyclists.
If the coned off lane was clear, then I would have ducked into it BUT, there is nothing wrong with the cyclist’s actions. He was within the law as people want
These links are to recent
These links are to recent stories in the Scunthtope Telegraph on the issue of cyclists using pavements.
http://www.scunthorpetelegraph.co.uk/Pensioner-slams-cyclists-riding-Scunthorpe/story-19989211-detail/story.html
This link in particular is what councilor Sherwood said about the issue in February this year, when he called for more action from the police to stop “pavement cycling”
http://www.scunthorpetelegraph.co.uk/Action-cycle-hits-boy/story-20617714-detail/story.html
I live across the Humber near Hull and not Scunthorpe but it is the same Police Force and in Hull in recent months there have been a few dozen cyclists that weren’t given a FPN for “pavement cycling” but taken to court and fined £200 plus costs of £85.
Pete B wrote:These links are
Why aren’t the local police following the advice reiterated by Home Office and ACPO in January of this year?
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2014/jan/20/police-cycling-pavements
‘Roadworks hold up traffic’
‘Roadworks hold up traffic’ is obviously not newsworthy enough?
Come on, he was just being
Come on, he was just being awkward. . I’d have let the cars pass out of courtesy!! Treat others how I wish to be treated? I have driven tractors and when a queue builds and if I can i pull over and show respect if possible to the other road users, and I do the same on my bike. It is easier to do on a bike as well. . .
saladfunky wrote:Come on, he
But – as the article asks: would it have made the news if it was a tractor? From the sounds of it a tractor going through that section wouldn’t have had anywhere to pull in. Even if it did, but the driver was an asshole and didn’t bother pulling in, would that have made the news? I highly doubt it.
Assuming said roadworks aren’t a mile long, the fact that “a hundred” cars were involved in the tailback just confirms one thing as far as I’m concerned: there are too many cars on the road.
Typical local rag anti-cyclist dogwhistle “reporting”.
I don’t know the width of the
I don’t know the width of the road but I would have ridden in secondary not primary whilst clinning the hill.
If you don’t know the width
If you don’t know the width of the road.. or the traffic conditions.. how on earth can you even start to make a judgement?
If there’s not enough space to let a car past.. then they have to wait. And better to prevent them even trying (by riding primary).
Couldn’t care less about the
Couldn’t care less about the story, but the comments section is brilliant.
This one’s going in the scrap book! =))
Needless to say “#bloodycyclists”
it’s 2.7 miles of gentle drag
it’s 2.7 miles of gentle drag up. So cars would be up there in 10 mins instead of 3 (assuming they could drive at the speed limit, which they couldn’t because it’s rush hour busy anyway…).
7 minute traffic delay shocker? My heart bleeds for em.
Road lanes are not the widest
Road lanes are not the widest I’ve ever seen.
Could a cyclist and a car be accommodated side-by-side in the lane without the cyclist being endangered? No.
Has the cyclist adopted the correct position on the road? Yes.
Is there a footpath? Yes but it’s the usual rural, tokenistic, piddling, poor surfaced excuse of a footpath.
Would it be legal for the cyclist to use the footpath? No.
Could a cyclist and a pedestrian be accommodated side-by-side on the path?No it is only one person wide.
Has the cyclist done anything wrong? No.
Was he the cause of the slow traffic? No, the road works were.
Would this be news if it was a horse-drawn vehicle, ambulance travelling slowly with a spinal casualty on board or an electric vehicle? Of course it wouldn’t.
What can be done? How about something radical like, I don’t know, possible a properly designed, installed and maintained cycle track running parallel to the dual-carriageway. 😕 Or is that too much logic for a town that doesn’t even exist? 👿
Note: Scunthorpe is under the steelworks. The town is actually Crosby and Frodingham.
What a load of utter
What a load of utter bullshit………..100 motorists held themselves up by their poor choice of transport.
Nothing happened, it’s a a complete non story / pathetic whinge.
Perhaps I’m not looking hard
Perhaps I’m not looking hard enough but I see no footpath – and the lane could have been blocked with construction vehicles – I smell a wind up.
http://bit.ly/1jrTjmi
Footpath is only on one side
Footpath is only on one side of the road. If your heading South East the path is on your left. Hope that helps.
Trouble is, you pull in …
Trouble is, you pull in … and then you can never get back out again into the endless stream of traffic.
Usual depressing selection of
Usual depressing selection of comments on the newspaper’s website there!
Up until now I always used to
Up until now I always used to ponder the question; If Ty-phoo put the T in britain who put the **** in S****horpe ? but now thanks to Nigel F I think I know the answer.
The comments section at the
The comments section at the end of that story is a very depressing demonstration of the mindset of the majority.
Scunthorpe – notable only for
Scunthorpe – notable only for its noteworthy addition to most corporate internet name filters…
This poor fella – probably
This poor fella – probably just done a shift at the steelworks (which is probably the shittiest job in Britain since Thatcher closed all the coal mines) and has to lug his poor tired body up this God forsaken bypass every day. Probably on a crappy old hybrid – in full overalls and heavy boots with a rucsac on.
Im sure we have all taken great pleasure in overtaking fellas like this on our carbon machines clad in our Rapha and ever so perfect socks trying to smash a Strava target.
Its people like him, however, that make this country great.
I cycled across a toucan
I cycled across a toucan crossing yesterday and was told off by a pedestrian (middle aged man).
I was riding considerately, very slowly, towing my daughter and a load of shopping. But for some reason he was upset.
Strange that the little green bicycle light didn’t mean anything to him.
I think often a lot of the problem is that people just have no idea about bikes, or cycling, or (as in this case) the Highway Code.
PJ McNally wrote:I cycled
This is as good a place as any to tell this one.
I once pulled up at a set of lights opposite a pub, and a very angry and possibly slightly drunk woman stepped out into the road and gave me a stream of abuse about how the stop line applies to cyclists as well as cars.
If you hadn’t guessed, we were both in the ASL box, she was actually standing right on top of the bike symbol. I wished both her and her slightly embarrassed husband well before riding on.
Quote:”It’s something we need
I commend Councillor Nigel Sherwood for taking the first steps in suggesting that we get 100 cars off the road and onto bikes.
Highway code rule 169?
Highway code rule 169?
“169
Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a large or slow-moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass.”
Applies to chaingangs and lone cyclists on big hills just as much as it does to tractors, cranes and all the other things we’d expect to pull over every so often if we encounted them causing a massive tailback when driving a car. https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/overtaking-162-to-169.
(sorry, pet peeve)
tom_w wrote:Highway code rule
The incident illustrates many facets of the biking dilemma, thankfully this time without casualties. Many posts clarify that the law gave this biker very little option but to cycle on the available lane. Other posts explain that the biker acted out of self preservation by cycling the way he did: “getting out of the way” would have expose him to increased risk when trying to “get in” again.
facet one: UK laws simply do not yet cater for the needs of a cycling nation; presumed liability should be introduced with much more severe penalties for cars hitting cyclists
facet two: the local authorities are to blame for not providing temporary bicycle lanes whilst the road works are going on (unthinkable in f.i. Holland)
facet three: a mentality change is necessary to make cycling safer in the UK; the only way to do so is to convert as many drivers to cycling in as short a time as possible; only then will cycling loose its “elitist” and “righteous” stigma and will such an incident be reported in the press as outrageous incompetence by local authorities and traffic police to provide safe bicycling lanes whilst the road works are being carried out.
tom_w wrote:Highway code rule
Where would it have been safe to pull in?
paulfg42 wrote:tom_w
Where would it have been safe to pull in?— tom_w
And how long should he wait for the traffic to pass?
tom_w wrote:Highway code rule
Pet peeve it may well be, but….
A) The rule uses the advisory wording “Do not” and then conditions it with “if necessary, pull in where it is safe….”
B) A safe place to pull over would not include an area coned off (see rule 288 “Do not drive through an area marked off by traffic cones” – also using the advisory wording). If it would not be safe to pull off and then rejoin then clearly the cyclist, chain-gang or tractor should not pull over.
C) The footpath rule 64 is really clear and legally enforceable “You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement” so the pavement was not an option.
So the rider in this case did exactly the correct thing.
I don’t like it when people criticise people on bikes for doing the right thing.
Sorry, pet peeve!
shay cycles wrote:tom_w
Pet peeve it may well be, but….
A) The rule uses the advisory wording “Do not” and then conditions it with “if necessary, pull in where it is safe….”
B) A safe place to pull over would not include an area coned off (see rule 288 “Do not drive through an area marked off by traffic cones” – also using the advisory wording). If it would not be safe to pull off and then rejoin then clearly the cyclist, chain-gang or tractor should not pull over.
C) The footpath rule 64 is really clear and legally enforceable “You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement” so the pavement was not an option.
So the rider in this case did exactly the correct thing.
I don’t like it when people criticise people on bikes for doing the right thing.
Sorry, pet peeve!— tom_w
Rules for cyclists? Damned if you follow them, damned if you don’t!
Further, rule 169 specifies driving. Cars, Vans, Lorries etc… are driven. Horses, Motorbikes, Mopeds and Bicycles are ridden not driven so 169 does not apply.
Thanks – a good point and
Thanks – a good point and even more justification that the rider was correct. :*
shay cycles wrote:tom_w
— tom_w
I completely agree, which is why I didn’t criticise him. If there was nowhere for him to pull over then he did exactly the right thing to continue to take the primary position and ride up the hill as is his right. I was simply pointing out that if there was somewhere for him to pull over safely then the highway code advises he should do so.
Someone else has suggested that 169 doesn’t apply to cyclists, in which case I stand corrected, although I still think it’s a pretty good rule for anything on the road to adhere to; my dislike of people causing massive tailbacks is not because of the delays they cause, it’s because of the idiocy they seem to trigger in some drivers. I’m sure we’ve all followed a tractor and seen cars overtaking on blind corners etc. because they simply ‘can’t’ wait any longer.
As someone else very rightly said, traffic management for road works often completely fails to take account of cyclists and other slow moving vehicles and that needs to be corrected. That goes for the timings on traffic lights at roadworks too which are often much to short to allow average cyclists to clear the area under traffic control.
I had a dog walker last week
I had a dog walker last week try and block me on the C2C though Washington, even though I am legally entitled to ride on it, and I slow and am courteous to all I pass. He just didn’t like people on bikes.
Point is that there are idiots out there who will find any excuse and bend any rule to suit their own hatreds and dislikes, and newspaper site comments sections are like honeytraps for windowlicking neanderthals.
My beef is with the Councillor, who judging from the recent reporting from the one paper, cannot say the same thing twice.
He doesn’t want cyclists on the pavement as they are a danger to walkers, and wants them off the road as they hold up cars. Please tell us Cllr Sherwood, just where the feck are we supposed to ride?
I think the real news is that
I think the real news is that Scunny has a hill 😉
Remember this chip wrapper is
Remember this chip wrapper is owned by the same people who own the The Daily Wail, in order to reduce costs they appear to no longer employ journalists or even people who can cross check back editions for previous articles on the subject, just article writers. Like its nearby sister chip wrapper The Hull Daily Mail, it survives by writing so called articles that sensationalise local events in order to allow deadheads to write ill informed and inaccurate comments in order to generate responses so that they can download adverts to increase their revenues. (|:
Gus T wrote:Remember this
It’s a shame the BBC website doesn’t feature click throughs. We could halve the licence fee on the back of all the guff on there.
Remember this chip wrapper is
Remember this chip wrapper is owned by the same people who own the The Daily Wail, in order to reduce costs they appear to no longer employ journalists or even people who can cross check back editions for previous articles on the subject, just article writers. Like its nearby sister chip wrapper The Hull Daily Mail, it survives by writing so called articles that sensationalise local events in order to allow deadheads to write ill informed and inaccurate comments in order to generate responses so that they can download adverts to increase their revenues. (|:
It’s a shame all the drivers
It’s a shame all the drivers and passengers sitting in the 100 cars weren’t riding bikes too…
It just highlights the lack
It just highlights the lack of provision for cyclists. It costs drivers nothing to take their foot of a pedal, that guy was under his own power. Once you get up momentum, you aren’t going to stop every few yards to let cars past.
If all the kids who wanted to ride to school did so, there’d be no room for the cars.
What’s normal in this world is not normal, it’s just how it’s been made to be normal. I wish when they’d churned up the original road to build this dual carraigeway, they’d left some way for other road users to get where they were going without needing to ride on this anyway.
I think his climb was a brilliant protest to an unthinking, wasteful world.
It just highlights the lack
It just highlights the lack of provision for cyclists. It costs drivers nothing to take their foot of a pedal, that guy was under his own power. Once you get up momentum, you aren’t going to stop every few yards to let cars past.
If all the kids who wanted to ride to school did so, there’d be no room for the cars.
What’s normal in this world is not normal, it’s just how it’s been made to be normal. I wish when they’d churned up the original road to build this dual carriageway, they’d left some way for other road users to get where they were going without needing to ride on this anyway.
I think his climb was a brilliant protest to an unthinking, wasteful world.
Perhaps, of the council
Perhaps, of the council consulted TAL 15/99 they might consider the appropriate lane widths for road works which are suitable for the drivers of motor vehicles to pass cyclists safely, noting the width specified for safe passing by LGV’s and PCV’s, it might then be appropriate to mark a temporary advisory cycle lane, which of course does not require a TRO, although the line closure itself may require one.
Well done that cyclist, and equally the driver in the vehicle following immediately behind for having the patience and sense not to hassle the cyclist, or respond to any pressures from the drivers behind them in the traffic queue.
[[[[[ Yes…on a Critical
[[[[[ Yes…on a Critical Mass ride in the Big Smoke a while back, the male driver of a very swish jamjar, blocked by bloody cyclists, was tearing his hair out and foaming at the mouth. His lady companion’s frown was so fierce her eyebrows descended to somewhere below her nose. “Having a nice evening?” I enquired.
“I’d get home a effing sight quicker without twats like you!” he grated.
“Well, fancy that!” I said. “Cyclists do this demo once a month, whereas drivers get in my way, block my progress and endanger my health twice a day, five days a week, and weekends too—so who’s a bigger twat?”
To give him his due, he sighed, began to look thoughtful, and said not another word.
P.R.
First world problems,
First world problems, eh?
Meanwhile, somewhere in the real world, a group of young girls gets kidnapped. #Perspective.
Truth is, only the first few cars in the tailback would have been aware that it was some bloke on a bike up front, so the story HAD to be told to ensure that EVERYONE was outraged.
Jeez, I despair. Come out here and sample the infamous Taiwanese road behaviour.
I get this a lot from my wife
I get this a lot from my wife and her mum – “Why does that cyclist have to go up that hill? Why couldn’t they just pull over and let everyone past?”. They both forget that a motor vehicle slowing down is a matter of easing off the accelerator pedal, maybe changing gear. Slowing down or stopping on a hill on a bicycle is a complete PITA as you then have to put a *lot* more effort (than a driver does) into getting started again…
And, as another poster has commented, its not exactly common for that ever-so-thankful queue of motor traffic to gratefully let you back into the main flow of traffic.
We need more of this sort of
We need more of this sort of reporting then maybe drivers will start demanding Space for Cycling. Is it too much to expect local hacks to figure that much out?
And no one even thought to
And no one even thought to stop and put his bike in the back to give him a well earned lift to the top of the hill.. 😉
I must admit I would probably
I must admit I would probably have pulled over at some point. However, I wasn’t there to tell you the facts, and I don’t know the road. If he had pulled over, and proceeded to let every queueing car pass by, then started riding again, at what point would he magically be obliged to pull over again? When there’s one more car behind him? Ten? At every single viable place to pull in? All this article demonstrates is that the dimwits that planned the roadworks didn’t take cyclists into account when they devised a single available lane. That the author of the article didn’t think to challenge this just illustrates the journalists’ investigative ability.
The local authority concerned
The local authority concerned should also be checking that the contractors have not taken more space than they need. I am quite certain they could have made a safe lane from one of those they had closed.
Boo f**king hoo, a cyclist
Boo f**king hoo, a cyclist holds up traffic. I remember coming home from a camping trip and the traffic was banked up for a few km’s. Thinking that there maybe an accident up ahead, we slowly moved along only to realise that it was just a ’roundabout’. There was no traffic once we went through the roundabout. Roundabouts have been in this country (Australia) for 30 odd years and they still hold up traffic and drivers still don’t know how to use them and you NEVER read in the papers or on the net that a ’roundabout’ is holding up traffic. Drivers need to build a bridge and get over it.
If Amazon, Startbucks, Green
If Amazon, Startbucks, Green and the rest of the morally bent tax dodgers paid their way we would have the cash for a decent cycling infrastructure, though no doubt it we did have this money the government would slash it up the wall on some half cooked idea…..special lanes for jaguar and bentley drivers.
Took a bus today as illness
Took a bus today as illness meant didn’t feel up to cycling. As expected the bus was _agonisingly_ slow, took about four times as long as the same journey would on a bike. The reason it was so slow was the whole route consisted of roads reduced to a single lane due to endless rows of parked cars on both sides (in some cases illegally parked in absurd places, but mostly parked quite legally), so that every time a vehicle came the other way the bus had to labouriously pull over to let it squeeze past.
The number one reason for delayed journeys is the presence of so many cars, and especially _parked_ cars. A great many supposed throughfares have now become primarily car parks.
(Even some of the pavements here are now too narrow for two pedestrians to pass each other due to parking bays being painted on them so as to leave just enough roadspace for at least one-way traffic)
Until motorists stop insisting on on-street parking (and stop making so many journeys in unnecessarily over-sized vehicles) then for them to complain about cyclists ‘holding them up’ is pure hypocrisy. Even the slowest cyclist moves faster than a parked car.
(This is actually the main reason why I gave up on buses in the first place. Almost invariably they’d be slower than _walking_ due to endless queues of near stationary cars stretching into the distance each with only one person in, and half the road surface being used as a car park. Motorists need to ‘put their own house in order’ before they complain about other modes ‘getting in their way’).
FluffyKittenofTindalos
Don’t get me started – we have a double buggy (twins), but it’s a narrow design – think it’5 65cm wide. Quite often I have to step onto the road to get round parked cars. I pity the first driver responsible who is actually present and within earshot when I have to do this, because the notion that their convenience and paintwork entitles them to use the pavement and force a pair of 6-month-olds into the road is one that I can get rather aggrieved with.
I work in Scunthorpe and have
I work in Scunthorpe and have to commute up mortal ash hill everyday to get home, so I have good experience of the hill / roadworks, it’s 2 lane’s, the road works are in the outside (overtaking/fast whatever you want to call it) lane, and it’s actually a 30 limit in the roadworks section, the works end half way up and then it’s back to national speedlimit, so to say the cyclist could of used the coned off area is ridiculous, he would of obviously ended up in the outside lane with fast moving traffic on the steepest part of the hill with no way back across other than to cut through traffic.
The path is set back about 3 feet from the curb, and you wouldn’t want to ride on it, rough, pot holed mainly broken up, and narrow. The section between the road and path, is no mans land, long grass and covered in general main road debris.
And there isn’t anywhere safe to pull in, other than an exit slip road from the steel works and a small gravel layby, either way it’s a constant flow of traffic around that time so he’d of been waiting a while!
I guess another point is that
I guess another point is that motorists really don’t seem to be able to see why cyclists might do the things they do (and don’t get me started on the commenter in my local paper’s website who asked why taxes should be used to pay for *anything* for people who choose to travel to work using a child’s toy (!!!)).
This morning I had a well-dressed middle-aged woman (older than me, anyway, and I’m 43) scream out of her window as we stopped next to each other at a junction that I had been “all over the f-ing road, you f-ing idiot!”. She then wound her window back up and raced off.
Wind back a quarter mile or so…
I was riding generally maybe three feet out from the kerb on a very wide downhill road (Queen’s Road, Bristol, for anyone that knows it, past the Students Union). As you may know, you have to be at least that far out unless you have full suspension, due to all the potholes and sunken trenches, and *sometimes* you need to move further out. I was going a good clip, and all of central Bristol is a 20mph speed limit anyway. No cars close behind me.
I went toward the right of the lane as I approached the first of a pair of mini roundabouts, to go straight on, then went across the second, then got passed by (it transpires) this woman so close that she practically touched my handlebars, making hand gestures at me, just as we both went through a pinch point caused by a zebra crossing with an island in the middle. I admit to making a rude hand gesture back at her, then carried on with my journey, where we met at the next junction (as you do).
Unfortunately, you cannot explain about the potholes and trenches as someone is screaming at you out of their window at a junction. You cannot explain that you are moving over to the right because that’s what you do where traffic is splitting off into two directions. You cannot explain that bikes have to go around raised mini roundabouts and cannot drive over the middle of them like many cars I see.
Just wanted to vent that, and to say, again, how much the invective thrown at cyclists in local papers is down to motorists not understanding and not considering why someone might do something.
Once again the cyclist
Once again the cyclist bashing even though most of the law breakers are motorists, RLJ’ing, creeping at junctions, lack of hand brake use, under taking, speeding, texting,the list is endless.
A cyclist on the other hand lawfully holds up traffic, is it really holding up traffic if they are following the highway code? Surely by now even the stalwart motor fascist should realise that the mass of cars on the highways is too much.
As a cyclist I obey the rules but still I got smashed off my bike by a Jeep driver even though a lane was empty for overtaking. He drove off. This should be an immediate lifetime ban. I would add that anyone in official office who spouts ridiculous comments should be booted out of office. They are truly too stupid to trust they could make a sensible decision on anything.
If the road does not have a
If the road does not have a minimum speed limit then technically no-one was held up by anyone. 👿
Brooksby: “You were all over
Brooksby: “You were all over the road” – that seems to be a standard excuse drivers have for close passes. You were all over the road, hence the (poor) driver had no choice *but* to close pass you – otherwise how would they have gotten to that next queue before you?!!
Note that cycling in a straight lane counts as “all over the road” if you’re more than 20 centimetres from the kerb.
You have nailed it there
You have nailed it there Paul.
In motorists’ parlance “all over the road” means “not in the gutter”.
I have been accused of this on an occasion when I did not waver from my line. It clearly meant that I was further out than the driver liked.