road.cc live blog – US comedian’s anti-cyclist rant and more
Your daily drip feed of cycling news
Wed, Nov 22, 2017 15:30
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.
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn’t especially like cake.
9 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
Boopop 3 minutes ago
@OnYerBike If we're going with "Primacy of man/women over machine", there ought to be a minimum weight *in proportion to the weight of the rider*, as well as a minimum CdA for a bike. At that point though there's not much point in developing bike technology though, unless those limits are set significantly lower than what is currently possible, while maintaining structural integrity.
OnYerBike 25 minutes ago
This one again? My answer hasn't changed: An overall weight limit is a obviously stupid way of ensuring bikes are structurally sound. Want to run super lightweight wheels//handlebars/frame/? Fine as long as the overall bike weight is >6.8kg. Hell, you can build a bike as light as you like, and it's fine as you glue some lead weights to the bottom. The opposite is true too - just because something is heavy doesn't mean it's structurally sound (see Bastion's Ti track handlebars in the Tokyo Olympics). If what matters is structural integrity, then the test should be of structural integrity. In some ways this is already enforced by the commercialisation rule, because in order to sell a bicycle component to the public, it needs to have met certain safety standards that relate to ability to withstand loads, fatigue cycles etc (e.g. ISO 4210). If the UCI believes compliance with the relevant standard is insufficient to ensure safety (slightly concerning for the wider public if true), then the UCI could mandate their own, higher standards along the same lines. There might be other reasons to keep the weight limit - for example it is in keeping with the principle of the "primacy of man over machine", and I think it is good for customers that most brands have moved towards a one-bike model for racing (rather than separate aero and climbing bikes). But just stop pretending it's doing anything for safety.
mdavidford 39 minutes ago
@lesoudeur I blame Marvel.
lesoudeur 1 hour ago
What is the difference between super predicable and predictable...why is everything "super"?
Jakrayan 1 hour ago
Kent Police confirmed that there are only 3 people working on these, and they get around 900 submissions every month, so they will only prosecute the most serious cases (though they didn't state collisions). The officer in charge did give me her email address to send links to private YouTube videos in case of any other incidents like this, however one I sent a couple of months ago of a punishment pass bounced back, so there may well be even fewer people in the department now.
Rome73 3 hours ago
Ignorance is not an excuse but it is a reason. A year or so ago, I was contracted by the Met Police in North London to do some free bike checks with them. We would set up on cycle lanes etc and the Police would offer advice on how to lock a cycle correctly and what types of lock to buy and they would offer to security mark the cycle. My small team would offer free bike checks. It was very well intentioned and all about ‘community relations’. However, the Police didn’t have a clue ..They were stopping illegal e-motorbikes and asking me to check the brakes (wot brakes? LOL) etc. I was pointing out to them - without causing any trouble for anyone - that these were not bicycles. The riders had no idea these were e-motorbikes. The police and riders all thought these were bicycles.
IanEdward 3 hours ago
I'm curious about that saddle! Looks a bit like a Fizik Terra Argo but flatter from nose to tail, just what I'm after...
Rendel Harris 3 hours ago
@GravelIsNothingNew If it doesn't catch any doping cheats then it shows it's justified as the threat of being tested at any hour has stopped people doping. Interesting logic though, investigations can only be justified if they're certain to discover a particular outcome, in which case there's no sense in having the investigation in the first place...
cardch 4 hours ago
I got their All Road model a few years ago and love it. It is a great shame these kind of companies don't get more publicity in the mainstream bike press.
ttbkaboom 4 hours ago
It was this specific example of clickbait wasn't a life changing thing. Not the crash, which was horrible. Hopefully being a collarbone the surgery was straight forward and there won't be any lingering effects like with the horror crash he had in the Basque Country. Cheers
9 thoughts on “road.cc live blog – US comedian’s anti-cyclist rant and more”
Wow that was the least
Wow that was the least original rant ever. I thought as it was (apparently) a comedian then there would be some jokes at some point. But he did just come across as a loud shouty idiot. Maybe he’s a character actor and we’re meant to laugh at the character’s awfulness rather than with him. I doubt it, though, as nowhere else in the performance was there any thought or subtlety. Or maybe there was, and i’m just obtuse.
Bikebikebike wrote:
Haven’t watched the video yet, so I don’t know what he says or the context, but “angry rant” pretty much describes most of Bill Burr’s material and persona. Some of it’s funny, some of it’s not.
gcj wrote:
Wow that was the least original rant ever. I thought as it was (apparently) a comedian then there would be some jokes at some point. But he did just come across as a loud shouty idiot. Maybe he’s a character actor and we’re meant to laugh at the character’s awfulness rather than with him. I doubt it, though, as nowhere else in the performance was there any thought or subtlety. Or maybe there was, and i’m just obtuse.
— gcj Haven’t watched the video yet, so I don’t know what he says or the context, but “angry rant” pretty much describes most of Bill Burr’s material and persona. Some of it’s funny, some of it’s not.— Bikebikebike
So people don’t have to watch, it is essentially him driving round talking/shouting to a camera in the car. It’s pretty much anti-cycling bingo with swear words and a few Americanisms thrown in. There is no overall theme that comes through. It’s just a stream-of-consciousness rant that is not funny and adds nothing to the debate.
Bikebikebike wrote:
Thanks: shame that, as I like quite a lot of his stuff.
A lot of it seems to be him doing an impression of what he thinks his dad should be, though: particularly Frank in F is for Family. Difficult to see where he ends and parody starts.
Slow news day? Or saving your
Slow news day? Or saving your energy for the slew of cycling infrastructure announcements included in the budget later?
Perhaps it would be safer for
Perhaps it would be safer for all concerned, if this internet ranter spent more time concentrating on the road and in proper control of his vehicle, than trying to attract youtube hits.
I imagine the so called
I imagine the so called comedian may profit if I click on his video, so I will not, as I suspect his tirade will bring nothing new. The problem with the internet is that it gives ranty loons like him a voice. It was better when they were stuck drinking on their own in bars so we could edge away when they kicked off.
Comedian? I thought the
Comedian? I thought the point of being a comedian was that you were funny, or am I missing something? Perhaps he’s just trying to show the same level of funniness as Jeremy Clarkson but in American terms i.e. none. I blame Donald Trump.
I suppose that this guy posts his “comedy” on line because nobody with a sense of humour is going to pay to see him.
Loved the video of Viola
Loved the video of Viola Brand. Until she tipped her bicycle onto the saddle.