Matt LeBlanc, who replaced Jeremy Clarkson as Top Gear host in 2016, has said that cycling in London “seems like a death sentence” and that he gets annoyed at cyclists riding more than two abreast.
> Top Gear on Cycling: Well, what did you expect?
The 50-year-old former Friends and Joey star was speaking in an interview for the Daily Mail’s Event magazine ahead of the new series of the BBC motoring programme, which starts on BBC2 on 25 February.
The American, who rents a home in central London while filming Top Gear, said: “I wouldn’t ride a bicycle there – it just seems like a death sentence.”
While Clarkson was never one to shy away from the opportunity of making a joke at the expense of cyclists, he may disagree with his successor’s views – the day after he was sacked by the BBC, he turned up at his west London home on a bike, to be met by doorstepping reporters.
> Jeremy Clarkson on his bike in every sense
LeBlanc went on to say that he has a problem with people who ride more than two abreast.
“It’s when there are three or four of them, side-by-side so they can chat – but they don’t move out of the way. That’s frustrating.
“Do I bump ’em with the car? No,” he clarified.
“But I maybe give a tap on the horn like, ‘Beep-beep! Come on, move over!’,” he added.
He also shared his views on driverless cars, revealing that he is opposed to the technology.
“I’m not a fan of the idea,” he explained. “The car represents a sense of freedom, it broadens your horizon. With the driverless car you might as well be in a taxi.
“I assume there is a place in the world for autonomous cars. There’s not a place for it in my world, yet.”
> Top Gear’s James May hits out at “complete bollocks” bike lanes and the myth of ‘road tax’
Duncan Dollimore, head of campaigns and legal at the charity Cycling UK, commented: “So Matt LeBlanc says he’s not a fan of driverless cars, because the car represents a sense of freedom and broadens your horizon.
“There’s no place for them in his world, but then there seems to be no place there for cyclists either, who he has issues with and who must move out of his way.
“If he asked Cycling UK members, 90 per cent of whom also have a driving licence, they’d probably tell him that cycling also gives them a sense of freedom, but they have no issues with the vast majority of drivers, just those in too much of a hurry to wait to get past them.”
He added: “Rather than constantly focusing in speed, perhaps Matt needs to try a little patience, and he might find those horizons expand.”
> Top Gear’s The Stig spotted being filmed in London – on a cargo bike
52 thoughts on “Top Gear’s Matt LeBlanc: Cycling in London “seems like a death sentence””
Top Gear presenter talking to
Top Gear presenter talking to the Daily Mail in “bikes are bad!” shocker
brooksby wrote:
Ha! Exactly. Dim-witted petrolhead acting like a dim-witted petrolhead. Who’d a thunk it! And in the Daily Heil as well – that paragon of diverse views!
Reminds me of the spoof
Reminds me of the spoof advert, showing a slinky car, with a blonde in the passenger seat, photographed in a vast expanse of mountains and empty roads. That’s the freedom dream the advertisers very successfully sell the gullible like Matt Leblanc. The reality is sitting in a traffic jam while cyclists go past you, because all the other gullible people fell for it as well.
Still Top Gear always was a fantasy, loved by people who can’t cope with reality.
So…. he said cycling in
So…. he said cycling in London looks dangerous and cycling more than 2 abreast is annoying BURN THE WITCH!!
Yeah, I missed the bit where
Yeah, I missed the bit where he said “bikes are bad” too.
“It’s when there are three or
“It’s when there are three or four of them, side-by-side so they can chat – but they don’t move out of the way. That’s frustrating.
“But I maybe give a tap on the horn like, ‘Beep-beep! Come on, move over!’,”
Do know what I find frustrating Matt? Drivers with no patience who use their horn to bully you out of the way.
scouser_andy wrote:
So based on the fact you’ve not commented on the 3 or 4 abreast bit as being inconsiderate or illegal, I’ll assume you’re happy to ride illegally and inconsiderately but then get upset when a someone gives a polite pip to let you know they’re there?
pastyfacepaddy wrote:
So based on the fact you’ve not commented on the 3 or 4 abreast bit as being inconsiderate or illegal, I’ll assume you’re happy to ride illegally and inconsiderately but then get upset when a someone gives a polite pip to let you know they’re there?
Hello Paddy.
Nope, you shouldn’t assume. It makes an ass out of…. forget it.
To be honest, I very raely see riders four abreast. In my experience, drivers often say they see riders doing this, but reality tends to be much different from their perception.
Whilst riding considerately two abreast/chainganging in Essex yesterday, a number of drivers felt the need to honk or close-pass, despite the fact there was plenty of road to be used. I indded found that frustrating.
PS; even if riders were four abreast, it’s not illegal to ride this way under the Highway Code btw. It’s not advised, but you’ll find that the phrasiology is ‘you should…’ rather than ‘you must…’ which indicates advice rather than a legal requirement.
pastyfacepaddy wrote:
You do know that’s against the law, right?
brooksby wrote:
If not done aggressively, it is legal:
[Highway Code Rule] “112. The horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to
warn other road users of your presence.”
No Sweat wrote:
I’ve not yet encountered a motorist able to give “a polite pip of their horn to let you know they’re there” in anything other than an aggressive manner…
brooksby wrote:
Perhaps you’re just being a tad over-sensitive?
No Sweat wrote:
You’re right: cos a two tonne metal box coming up behind me and going “baaaaarrrp!” just always sounds so gosh darn friendly 😉
No Sweat wrote:
Car horns at the moment only have one tone and one volume, intended to be clear to other drivers, not to pedestrians, cyclists, horse-riders or skate-boarders.
The Car Of The Future will classify the things in front of it and sound off accordingly, thus “Excuse me, madam”, “Die, you liberal commie tree-hugging bastard lycra-clad lout!”, “Naff orf!” or “Du-u-u-de!” respectively.
brooksby wrote:
I have plenty of times. Spanish, French, Italian motorists are all very good at it. Years ago I did some guided riding in Greece and the guide warned us not to start shouting “wanker!” at any motorist who hooted as they were just doing it to make us aware of their presence.
I’ve thought many times about giving a “pip, pip” on the horn when overtaking (as you’d do in a road race) but it would be misinterpreted by the vast majority of riders. So I just content myself with making an obviously careful safe overtake – hanging back until safe then keeping the RH indicator on throughout the overtake and pulling right over into the other lane.
crazy-legs wrote:
That’s exactly what your horn or flashing your lights is suppose to do – warn others of your presence – but thick British people use it the wrong way. So I was taught to NEVER flash my lights while driving due to the increased numbers of road users from other countries who would interpret the correct way and so you would be the cause of an accident.
Oh and none of the local cycling or tri clubs cycle more than two abreast. Some are actually annoying and cycle in single file making it harder to get passed as a cyclist or in a motorised vehicle.
crazy-legs wrote:
I waved a driver through on Saturday and he pipped the horn as a thanks as he drove past. One of our group though the was being an arsehole so it’s easy to to confuse!
scouser_andy wrote:
Top Gear continues to be come
Top Gear continues to be come less relevant by the day. Perhaps the BBC should start to fund a similar programme for cycling where people like Chris Boardman can enlighten the population about the dangers presented by motorists, even when they drive in single file.
Top Gear presenter in
Top Gear presenter in “bicycle related statement that shouldn’t cause offence to anyone, cyclist or not” shocker
This is nothing but public
This is nothing but public relations style click bait… to advertise the new series, however it’s a very ‘gentle opinion’ never stepping too far into the troll zone.. ergo.. nonsense.
Ratings obviously struggling
Ratings obviously struggling a bit
I really can’t see what the
I really can’t see what the fuss is about here.
I’ve cycled in London a handful of times and it is pretty daunting in places. To a non cyclist it probably does seem terrifying.
If you’re cycling 3 or 4 abreast it is polite to let people pass.
As for the driverless cars comment, I think most people would prefer to be in a taxi for their utility driving. Very few people actually drive for leisure.
Some of the comments on here
Some of the comments on here come across a bit too touchy including the comment cited by Duncan Dollimore. At least Leblanc acknowledges that two abreast is ok, and who does not get irritated when there is more than two abreast and they do not line up to let a car go passed ? If I was a non cyclist with an attitude problem against cyclists, some of the comments on here would reaffirm my prejudices against cyclists. And I do not watch Topgear or any other car show with Middle Aged presenters having repeated the same content for the last 20 years …..
Driver admits cyclists
Driver admits cyclists cycling illegally i.e. more than 2 abreast annoy him and then goes on to confess he doesn’t then drive into them as a result of his annoyance.
As a cyclist I’d also like to admit that cyclists cycling illegally also annoy me and I also don’t ride into them however I will, in the absence of a horn, verbally remind them of cycling no more than two abreast as I pass them.
pastyfacepaddy wrote:
For clarity, it isn’t illegal to cycle more than 2 abreast
pastyfacepaddy wrote:
Leaving aside for a moment ,the fact that >2 abreast is NOT “illegall” , when you overtake the 3 or more, aren’t you then making it 4 or more, and being part of the problem?
I’m not entirely sure what
I’m not entirely sure what was wrong with what he said? London IS a dangerous place to cycle and when I come up behind cyclists that are two or three abreast and they don’t move, it’ pisses me off too! When I’m out riding next to someone and I notice a car coming, I pull in line to try and make it easier for it to pass. It takes no time or effort so I’m not sure why people don’t do it?
wilkij1975 wrote:
Whilst shrinking into the gutter and doffing your cap? I guess it varies depending on the type of road, but the fairly fast roads near me require an almost central position, or two abreast, to help encourage car drivers to think before overtaking. If you ride in the gutter, they’ll squeeze in between you and the oncoming car without hesitation.
It’s not a case of being stubborn, or deliberately trying to upset drivers. I’ve had cars try and overtake between me and a traffic island before!! The other day as I walked my kids to school, a lady in a 4×4 stopped for the traffic lights, straddling both lanes. This was because she had started to overtake a bicycle, as the road pinched for the traffic lights, outside a school with loads of children about. Without really thinking of what would happen next. The oncoming vehicle wasn’t best pleased that he had to wait for her to move back to her own side of the road once the lights went green.
Nothing to see here, except:
Nothing to see here, except:
“Matt LeBlanc, who replaced Jeremy Clarkson as Top Gear host in 2016” – no he didn’t!
“LeBlanc went on to say that he has a problem with people…”
I read that to be a bike was mentioned and he deflected about 15 questions relating to bikes before actually answering one…
Oh no! I’m commenting on a
Oh no! I’m commenting on a click-bait article about a click-bait interview with the star of a show intent on offending everyone! …
That turns out to be quite sensible.
Cycling in London can be dangerous
riding more than 2 abreast is annoying for everyone else.
We should all be grateful he
We should all be grateful he’s raising awareness of he poor infrastructure and too many cars and lorries on the streets of central London, which makes cycling there appear dangerous to him
If you’re more than 2 abreast
If you’re more than 2 abreast you are inconsiderate and not sharing the road. It would be impossible to overtake safely at any distance if cyclists are 3 abreast on a 2 lane road, which while not a motivating factor in everything about cycling, is a motivating factor if you’re being polite.
How many times do you get annoyed in a rush walking on the pavement behind a group trundling along occupying the whole width?
I’m with Matt on this one. Maybe the article could be updated to show how 3 or more abreast is going against recommended practice?
ts437 wrote:
Therefore, if there’s a HGV in front of me and I can’t get past on my bike that means that that HGV driver is being inconsiderate and not sharing the road??
ts437 wrote:
It wouldn’t be impossible, it depends entirely upon the width of the road, the car and how close the cyclists are to the kerb and eachother.
When I get annoyed as a pedestrian my speed and mass isn’t such that it is likely to kill them whilst completely protecting me.
What is your point exactly?
ts437 wrote:
His comment might be acceptable if he wasn’t in a car that probably occupies the width of 3 bicycles. Just because his mobile obstrauction is potentially faster is no excuse for one person to occupy so much road space.
Hardly a particularly
Hardly a particularly controversial statement is it.
One of the local cycling clubs occasionally holds more relaxed cycles for the less sporty cyclists, I’ve seen them cycling three or four abreast on country roads a couple times (not a single lane, only just wide enough for two cars). That annoys me.
Makes it very difficult for me to pass them on my bicycle, let alone a car. All it requires is a bit of common sense – from all road users (horse riders, tractors, cyclists – whatever).
Driverless cars too much like taxis? I’d love a driverless car! Means on my 40 minute cross-city commute, I could sit back and relax. Also means I could have a couple drinks with my friends before going home.
wellsprop wrote:
On a bicycle, you can open your mouth and politely ask them to let you past. that works for me every time. However car manufacturers have forgotten this, I haven’t been able to do this in a motor vehicle since Land Rover stopped fitting opening vents beneath the (fold flat) windscreens. Why don’t vehicle manufacturers fit modest PA systems in motor vehicles? Horns are for rude motorists, polite people talk to each other.
janusz0 wrote:
Oh yeah, can you imagine the cacophany of road rage spewing out of in-car PA systems! Kids going to school would have to wear earplugs!
F**k right off, you
F**k right off, you aggressive jerk.
I find the moderate hum of an
I find the moderate hum of an engine not being revved, brakes not under pressure and a presence not right on my shoulder feels like a polite notification; I then move over accordingly…
alansmurphy wrote:
Exactly. I suspect the presence of a car behind is known to any but the most hard of hearing cyclist before any use of the horn can be heard.
alansmurphy wrote:
^ This. And for all anyone knows the 3-4 a-breasters might have got fed up with poor overtakes earlier when they were being more accommodating but not getting sensible responses from motorists.
They should have stuck him in
They should have stuck him in that Tesla car and launched him – perhaps he could have found a world that suits his antedeluvian ideas.
Yeah. riding out single file
Yeah. riding out single file if there’s more than say three of you doesn’t add up, the old thinking of singling out really isn’t helping most of the time, in far too many instances it encourages close passes or overtakes on bends, which is why the HC is massively out of date on this and creates the problem of motorists and police getting irate or doing sod all when incidents do happen.
I’ve done the double short beep to get attention of peds to wave them across so that they are out of harms way and no longer needing consideration, it’s often far easier/safer for all simply to slow down when you spot that you’re potentially posing a hazard to other road users and allow them to progress, it removes the uncertainty of the situation particularly if there are children present.
Beeping a cyclist, hmmm, not sure on that, it’d have to be a very specific circumstance, wait a few seconds and things tend to right themselves even if the person in front (who has priority in any case) isn’t following what you interpret as the rules of the road. It’s still encumbent on you as the one posing the threat of harm to make sure they are safe even if they aren’t exactly adhering, two wrongs never makes a right and all that.
Yes there are going to be instances of people on bikes in high density areas such as London that share roads with motors where there may occasionally be some 4 abreastness going on, more so at light intersections where people are going/setting off at different speeds.
It’s in these situations that highlights the need for either segregated infra or simply making the route one way only for motorists and using the other lane for bi-directional cycling, particularly on through roads. The other alternate is simply to wait for those on bikes to do what they are doing and then get past when it’s safe because it’s pretty rare for the 3-4 abreast thing to remain so after a few seconds of people sorting themselves out.
Or you could just ditch the motor altogether or go on the MOTOR Way, just a thought.
Rather than beeping to
Rather than beeping to acknowledge moving over, which even not done in aggressive manner does somewhat annoy, as the horn is often used to be aggressive, I would prefer the left right indicator thing which HGV drivers tend to do on motorways to say thanks. Ta.
Cheers for that Joey, very
Cheers for that Joey, very wisdomous.
This is very weak sauce.
This is very weak sauce. Doesn’t Mr. TheWhite know that he needs to be a lot more immoderate if he wants to create enough controversy to draw back the fans of Mr. Clarkson’s unsustainable reactionary opinions. Instead of saying he thinks more than two abreast, the limit set by the Highway Code, is annoying, he should’ve said he thinks cyclists riding two abreast should be shot. Then, when people point out that is incitement to violence, he’d then be able to claim it was all a joke, and the PC brigade have no sense of humour, and that if people agree they should tune in next Sunday for more merry japery from him and his other overgrown infant co-hosts.
Ffs, can we all just get
Ffs, can we all just get along with each other?
I drive, I ride. I am considerate to cyclists when I’m in the car. I’d like some consideration when I’m pedalling, and I usually get it.
My children just ride, please be considerate to them too.
Ffs, can we all just get
Ffs, can we all just get along with each other?
I drive, I ride. I am considerate to cyclists when I’m in the car. I’d like some consideration when I’m pedalling, and I usually get it.
My children just ride, please be considerate to them too.
bigfatron wrote:
The problem is that to some drivers, possibly including LeBlanc, “all get along” means “I get along, you fuck off out of my way”.
I don’t see what the issue is
I don’t see what the issue is here
LeBlanc says “It’s when there are three or four of them, side-by-side so they can chat – but they don’t move out of the way. That’s frustrating.”
Highway code, Rule 66 says “You should never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends.“
So here LeBlanc is being more tolerant that the Highway code as I assume that most roads in London could be considered “busy roads”.
LeBlanc says “I maybe give a tap on the horn like, ‘Beep-beep! Come on, move over!’,”
Highway Code Rule 112 says “The horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence.“
So here is looks like LeBlanc is using his horn within the guidance of the Highway Code. When I come across a group of pedestrians on the river/park/canal path walking more then 2 abreast I am likely to ding my bell to alert them to my aproaching presence, don’t see how this is any different.
LeBlanc says that cycling in London “seems like a death sentence”
Does anyone disagree that the inner city infrastructure and attitudes to cyclists are creating something along these lines? Certainly the KSI statistics for London do not seem to indicate that his statement is not without grounds. Note that he does not say what is to blame, only that it “seems like a death sentence”.