The horse rider who filmed the moment she was hit by a competitor in yesterday’s Windsor Triathlon who undertook her at speed during the cycling leg of the event has said that police are investigating the incident.
The footage, shot by Facebook user Jennifer Katherine, has been viewed more than 3.8 million times on the social network since being posted yesterday morning.
In a follow-up post, she called for road users to show mutual respect towards each other, adding that the incident is “Under investigation with police” as well as with officials from Human Race, the organisers of the event.
The route of the cycling leg of the event lies entirely within Berkshire, meaning that Thames Valley Police would be the relevant force, and the horse rider was reportedly due to speak officers this afternoon.
Meanwhile yesterday evening, following publication of our original story on the incident, Human Race reiterated on social media that they are conducting a full investigation and that any riders identified through the video will be excluded from future events.
> Video: Horse and rider struck by undertaking cyclist participating in triathlon
They said: “We are in contact with the individual effected by the horrible incident earlier today at Windsor Triathlon. We want to sincerely apologise to her and her poor horse.
“We have convened a senior level committee internally, and along with British Triathlon we will be reviewing the video evidence to identify those involved in this.
“Those at fault will be disqualified and banned from all future Human Race events.
“There will be further ramifications for these people with British Triathlon and potentially further action taken,” they added.
69 thoughts on “Police probing triathlon cyclist’s undertake of horse rider”
It’s right that the Police
It’s right that the Police are investigating, it would also be great if they would jump to it on the over 100 close passes shown on this website.
So attempted murder/attempted
So attempted murder/attempted GBH with intent 4 years with hard labour/bread and water.
It’s a shit show for sure but as usual the over-reaction to what is a relatively minor incident is made into a major fucking witch-hunt, same old.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
It’s hardly a minor incident.
newtonuk wrote:
relative to all those people, and indeed horses, killed or seriously injured each year it’s trivial. It’s not worse than my being forced into a ditch by an aggressive BMW drivet, which the police didn’t even pretend to care about. Sure, it’s a big thing for horse and rider, but it genuinely is minor by any objective standard.
oldstrath wrote:
So you accept that being run off the road is a trivial, minor incident?
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
I wondered who’d be the first to minimise this…. and it’s you.
Nemesis wrote:
I wondered who would overreact to what is a minor incident that happens tens of thousands of times a year to people on bikes who don’t get a response by plod, don’t go whining to the media don’t get millions getting on the case of motorists.
If you can’t see how minor this is COMPARATIVELY you have no objectivity whatsoever.
The over reaction is fucking ridiculous, well done for jumping on the bandwagon and as I said, it’s a shit show by the knobs on the bikes but this IS a minor incident whichever way you look at it. Unpleasant but minor… relatively speaking which is what I said.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
I wondered who’d be the first to minimise this…. and it’s you.
— Nemesis I wondered who would overreact to what is a minor incident that happens tens of thousands of times a year to people on bikes who don’t get a response by plod, don’t go whining to the media don’t get millions getting on the case of motorists. If you can’t see how minor this is COMPARATIVELY you have no objectivity whatsoever. The over reaction is fucking ridiculous, well done for jumping on the bandwagon and as I said, it’s a shit show by the knobs on the bikes but this IS a minor incident whichever way you look at it. Unpleasant but minor… relatively speaking which is what I said.— BehindTheBikesheds
But, y’know: “horses”! 😉 :-))
(Instead of mere dandy-horses…)
The public like horses, and I suspect that a horse owner has a greater chance of knowing the chief constable…
The public image of cycling
The public image of cycling just took a big hit.
Well done you assholes in the clip.
Plasterer's Radio wrote:
Triathletes not cyclists. It’s like grouping poodles and whippets. I’d be shell shocked if someone asked me if was a triathlete. How embarrassing.
Yorkshire wallet wrote:
The public image of cycling just took a big hit.
Well done you assholes in the clip.
— Yorkshire wallet Triathletes not cyclists. It’s like grouping poodles and whippets. I’d be shell shocked if someone asked me if was a triathlete. How embarrassing.— Plasterer's Radio
That’s a very good point, I have never heard anyone group those collectively along with all other breads and refer to them as “dogs”. It’s clear from the comments on this site as whenever anyone complains about such an animal causing issues on their cycle they always refer to it by bread and never group them with the term “dog” or “dogs”…..
ClubSmed wrote:
But no matter which way you slice it, that
cyclist, sorry, triathlete, should have used his loaf.Yorkshire wallet wrote:
The public image of cycling just took a big hit.
Well done you assholes in the clip.
— Yorkshire wallet Triathletes not cyclists. It’s like grouping poodles and whippets. I’d be shell shocked if someone asked me if was a triathlete. How embarrassing.— Plasterer's Radio
Mehhh – there’s loads of pro cyclists that have done triathlon. Jalabert did long distance with great success.
I really don’t get all this cliquey-ness. its just as bad as nobbers who lump all cyclists together. Get over yourself.
this should be good news for
this should be good news for Thames Valley cyclists.
Plod are investigating.
This means that any close pass that results in contact with a cyclist as the victim must be investigated too. No excuses.
The outcome of this investigation will determine how cyclists are treated when caught up in equally horrible incedents.
I’m sure plod will be happy to explain the difference between this and cyclist being close passed and clipped by a motorised vehicle, especially why they think that this is worth spending precious resources on.
don simon wrote:
It’s the undertaking they’re concerned with surely?
Noelieboy wrote:
Do you mean filtering in slow moving traffic? As per the HC
I’m just throwing it out there, so to speak!
I agree they have no common
I agree they have no common sense riding like that in a well established event.
Road.cc need to up their game. The Daily Mail has you beaten hands down!
Cyclists should be in the velodrome and the horse in a field!! Because they “dont have an MOT”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-44512967
Amanda Coyne must have had a dreadful experience. I wonder what kind of compulsion the four cyclists applied to the poor motorist to “force” him or her to overtake. Gun to the head perhaps?
Morgoth985 wrote:
I had the same thought when I read that article:
[quote-BBC]Amanda Coyne, who lives near the route of the race, said she had encountered cyclists riding “dangerously” while driving shortly before 09:00.
“I nearly had a heart attack as I nearly got hit by a car which had been forced to overtake cyclists who were riding four-abreast,” she said.
“They were riding at such speeds and didn’t care who was coming in front of them and who was behind them and I really worried there was going to be a terrible accident.”[/quote]
“They were riding at such speeds…” but obviously not fast enough for the car driver who was “forced to overtake”.
Don’t people actually think before openiong their mouths?
It might be the view angle,
It might be the view angle, but even the cyclists overtaking on the correct side seem to be a bit close.
So I haven’t visited the
So I haven’t visited the Facebook page, but I wonder if anyone can advise how many posts there are on there of dangerous or unpleasant behaviour towards her by motor vehicle drivers? I guess it doesn’t record the number of times she thinks “I might go for a hack this this afternoon, but maybe not” because of having to run the motorised gauntlet each time – but that wouldn’t make very good viewing, would it?
I hope the triathlete riders involved will make/ have made themselves known – they may not be “proper cyclists”, but these tribal distinctions of ours are lost on the wider world.
David9694 wrote:
She has posts with videos of inconsiderate drivers as well, but strangley these haven’t received the same publicity as the triathletes stupidity.
rct wrote:
strange indeed: not wishing to rekindle the earlier minor/relatively minor argument, this incident doesn’t seem to have drawn blood or broken any bones and I think has relatively little potential to have done so, alarming though it was – the car incidents undoubtedly do have that dangerous potential, yet this is taken for granted.
i’m uncomfortable with the “there were signs /why did she have to go out at that time?” argument, as we’ll get that thrown back at us with compound interest. (Unless it’s all been done to make a point about this race, like the two Scottish farmers standing in the road a few months back.)
Not that I condone the
Not that I condone the cyclists’ behaviour in any way but, based on my experience with the side of a van in London, just say that at no point did you see the horse or rider. Easy. No further action.
28 years of one of the most
28 years of one of the most prominent races in the world. Televised live by the BBC back in the day,but the horse rider had no idea. Whilst I might expect the horse to be unable to read I would expect the owner to show some care.
so whilst not condoning the riding, I can understand it in all the adrenaline of racing and the difficulty of changing course quickly on a TT bike etc etc.
this race has large signs all around the course and all it’s entry points so if this woman drove a car at any point around here the coppers might ask how she missed them.
no time for the horse rider who could easily have avoided this and probably entered the course at the precise time of the race just to get a reaction, idiocy of the highest degree and if I was the copper investigating she’d not like some of my questioning.
FatBoyW wrote:
Agreed, she should’ve used a bridle path…
Not closed-road so legally
Not closed-road so legally nobody is doing anything wrong by entering the ‘course’ (also known as a public road)
Yorkshire wallet wrote:
It makes you wonder why this triathlon wasn’t a closed-road event – even a rolling closure, being a race. That said, there’s no excuse for riding that close to a horse or passing one at those speeds. Typical alpha-male, dickheaded behaviour.
28 years of one of the most
Duplicate
Absolutely agree some of the
Absolutely agree some of the route is open road. Just talking about common sense and riding with due care of your steed. She could have enquired when the race was going to go by, its wave starts so most will be past in a short period and then ridden when there were only a few riders on the tri and it would have still been quiet as people avoid the course due to the triathlon.
just saying use a bit of the old common and have some regard for your horse too.
that said she most certainly has a right to use the open road, I guess they were invented for her mode of transport
FatBoyW wrote:
She was wearing hi-viz and I assume the camera wasn’t bolted to her head, so a helmet too. I see no evidence of a tail light though and that dappled sunlight probably made it difficult for the rider to see them. She could/should have done more to protect herself. I hope the rider isn’t too traumatised after what could have been a life changing incedent.
don simon wrote:
The dappled horse probably helped her blend in too…
I hope people are just
I hope people are just trolling for a reaction,as I just can’t believe anyone can blame the horse rider for being there on a public open road and then getting hit by an undertaking rider who has enough time after they’ve passed to seemingly raise a middle finger in response,and then we wonder why cyclists get such a rough time & no sympathy from the public when we are on the receiving end of this kind of stuff.
Simple – triathlons are
Simple – triathlons are competitive by nature and should not be allowed on open roads.
MarkiMark wrote:
As are time trials. road races, some athletics events.
But is it competitors causing deaths ? Oh no – thats cars going about their every day business.
Rule No.42. A bike race shall
Rule No.42. A bike race shall never be preceded with a swim and/or followed by a run.
It’ll be interesting to see
It’ll be interesting to see what the police are going to charge the cyclist with. Playing devils advocate the cyclist passing on the left are just filtering aren’t they ? As per the HW code.
Perhaps cps will go with the class W&F charge, which just about guarantee a conviction at the hands of a jury of motorists. Given that nobody was injured it’ll be interesting what prison sentence they’ll get, I would think 6 months at least as the bay mob will need to appeased. Also am I missing something or does the impact not happen on camera ? as every cyclist with a helmet cam knows that means it didn’t happen according to the police.
Housecathst wrote:
Nope.
fukawitribe wrote:
Nope.— Housecathst
really ? Why ? Perhaps the speed aspect, but that’s subjective and the HW code does sent a speed limit.
Disclamer, I wouldn’t ride like this in a million years, and the rider are dicks.
Housecathst wrote:
Rules 163, 167 and 214 would be a start.
Housecathst wrote:
Road Traffic Act 1988 c52, part 1. covers most aspects in this instance. A plain English Guide can be found at https://www.cyclistsdefencefund.org.uk/cycling-offences where the penalty tariffs can also be found.
Housecathst wrote:
When it comes to horses, the Highway Code states “Always pass wide and slowly.” None of the cyclist were passing particularly wide or slow. They were in ‘race mode’, just like the pros who jump level crossings.
A lot of Whataboutism going
A lot of Whataboutism going on in this post.
Yes, the police should do more about close passes and the government more about supporting Cyclists and fixing the dreadful way many motorists believe that cyclists do not have a right to be on the road.
However, the way many of the cyclists pass this horse rider is unacceptable. We all know that when you see a horse rider you slow down and give plenty of space.
MalOSB wrote:
If you’re determined to use clever-sounding interspaz lingo like “whataboutism” (the correct term is “whataboutery” BTW) perhaps you should understand what such terms mean.
I don’t see anyone defending the poor riding of those triathletes. However, pointing out the glaring double standards of both the public and the police when cyclists suffer similar (and far worse) poor treatment from motorists is a perfectly valid point to make.
163 and 167 are irrelevant,
163 and 167 are irrelevant, this is filtering in slow moving traffic not overtaking.
214 perhaps, but it’s subjective as no passing distances or speed are given, as ever the Highway Code is shit
Housecathst wrote:
Entirely relevant, this is overtaking. Also 66-68.
It is not enumerated but I would suggest that at least one of those maneuvers obviously failed the ‘plenty of room’ criterium and a number of them were not riding ‘slowly’. I thought you acknowledged that with your comment on their riding.
fukawitribe wrote:
Why don’t you think this is filtering ? I’m only really talking about the cyclist passing on the left. But in general none of the passes by any of the cyclists is any different than I would expect from a motorist over taking a cyclist.
Also define ‘slowly’ in terms of the HW code ?
Housecathst wrote:
Either filtering (which is not a recommended maneuver in the HWC, just a situation that may occur) or overtaking have the onus on care – which is clearly breeched. If you wish to call it ‘filtering’ then go ahead, it’s over-taking to me (or under-taking if people wish). The duty of care is also applicable to some of those passing on the outside of the horse, in particular that last group, and especially when passing an animal – as explicitly laid out in the HWC.
As for the definition of ‘slowly’ – as I said, it’s not defined – that is why I used the phrase “I suggest” and only for a number of riders, certainly not all. Feel free to disagree, entirely your prerogative obviously. Think i’m done anyway, can’t see you changing your mind on the meaning of ‘care’ or what is or is not overtaking, just find it depressing that you can suggest that the actions of the rider on the left are in anyway consistent with the wording or apparent intent of the code. Whatever, lifes too short mate.
Wonder what they will charge
Wonder what they will charge him with if they find him, dangerous cycling, careless cycling or furious cycling
https://www.cyclistsdefencefund.org.uk/cycling-offences
Like charlie Alliston police
Like charlie Alliston police/justice system will want to make an example of him. In the same way that plod will do everything they can to fob you off when a motorist hits you or in the case of Michael Mason and others actuvely blame you for your death/injury and state no case to answer.
As I said the difference in approach to prosecution and protection of people on bikes is hugely different compared to everyone else..
The BBC even printed a spurious bullshit comment by a woman who was “forced” to overtake ‘speeding’ cyclists riding 4 abreast then blamed them for her nearly crashing into an oncoming motorvehicle.
This was yet more bullshit used to bash those in the triathlon yet it was the motorists actions that were dangerous ffs!
Whilst I agree that the
Whilst I agree that the comparitive reaction to how cyclists are treated by motorists needs consideration, we are muddying the waters here. Imagine if this video had been a cyclist pootling away and a dozen drivers passed like that, inside and outside at such speed and proximity.
Disgusting behaviour by a bunch of shithouse riders and giving the finger is the ulitmate sign of him/her thinking ‘might is right’. I’d honestly question the thought of TTs being on open roads, I would suggest the better riders usually come out near the top but surely any junction, roundabout etc. just means those prepared to risk themselves or others will prosper!
I live nearby, there’s no way
I live nearby, there’s no way you could have missed all the notification signs. At all. Maybe the full footage from the camera will show if they passed them or not …
But according to the law and
But according to the law and joe public this would be careless/inconsiderate cycling at the very most, we have an example only last week were a driver was on the wrong side of the road and according to police have seen the person they KILLED for 40+seconds, and yet the majority of the drivers peers adjudged it to be just a bit careless of her in her actions that killed a human being!
The judge apparently also thought it was only a minor incident and let the driver off with a little slap on the wrist, oh and this was replicated again later in the week and it’s happened again and again and again. Those poor sods nr Rhyll where the Chief Inspector at the scene called it an accident, lied about the speed involved and then police decided that driving at 50mph on a bend on icy roads with bald tyres wasn’t dangerous and no prosecution for killing four human beings, just a con and use infraction so £180 fine!
The bar is set, it’s should not be in the public interest to do anything here going by the standard set by plod/cps and indeed the peers of the rider/s involved as we know their thoughts on what constitutes dangerous and it doesn’t include killing people so a MINOR incident like this should not even be worth the bother.
I’ve recieved worse injuries from a motor and police weren’t interested, THREE fucking times I’ve been injured including a hit and run, including a police officer witnessing the driver on one occasion confess to her actions and hitting me, they couldn’t be fucking arsed.
As I said, it’s a different set of rules/laws for people on bikes that we are held to (which in itself is unlawful) that in same/similar circumstances gets no media, no attention and police shrug their shoulders and flick you off.
Why are we not questioning the judgement of the horse rider to be on that road, at that time in the first place, oft police will tell you to get off a road because it is ‘dangerous’ due to other traffic posing a threat to you (major A roads, cycling at night etc even despite light traffic). They will even prosecute you for going on to a motorway despite the fact statitisically it’s safer on the hard shoulder than most other roads. So why judge it would be safe to go along a section of road in the knowledge you have a very large wild/flight animal to control, except when it goes into flight mode you can’t control it at all, it’s not like a dog where you can hold it on a leash. I also don’t believe the ‘didn’t see any signs’ comment.
Are the cyclists dicks yes, but she has to shoulder some of the responsibility for going out on a section of road ignoring the warning signs that were up everywhere (according to the organisers) that made it no different to a cyclist going on the hard shoulder of a motorway.
again, we can’t have one set of parameters/way of thinking for one group and not apply that to all the rest.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
Just to comment on this particular nugget of crap.
From someone who claims to have been involved in collisions on at least 3 seperate occassions on public roads when you were no doubt aware of the presence of larger, faster motorised traffic. Do you really feel that you have some accountability for your injuries simply for being where you were, perfectly legally?
As to not being aware of the race? Many is the time I have gone out for a ride and come across gaggles of cyclists involved in some sportive or organised event that I had no clue was running that day at that particular time warning signs or not.
Mungecrundle wrote:
Nugget of crap sums you up sonshine.
Bother to actually read were I said the rules are being applied differently, you cannot on one hand say you can’t/shouldn’t go here because of an increased risk and/or speed/density of traffic that includes stuff that might potentially harm you or indeed others and then when an incident occurs you are blamed by everyone including authorities, only to then ignore that ‘rule’ or advice when it occurs to someone else/different road user. Just because you have a right to be there doesn’t mean that that is a sensible thing to do given how our society behaves as a whole. call it whataboutery all you like but that is the world we live in and you cannot have different sets of rules for similar groups and then pass even if partially blame on to one but not the other.
This is crux of what I said, should the horse rider be allowed to ride there and feel safe to do so, absolutely, my partner rides a horse and has done since she was a child. I don’t race but like to ride fast when appropriate and would have been completely on the opposite side of the road if I were going to go at any speed. That we already have motorvehicles overtaking us at 50/60/70mph on similar stretches of road often with not much difference in gap (aside from the guy who struck the horse) is utterly ignored by joe public, this occurs every single day, week in week out thousands of times over, often resulting in serious injury or death or to the point were people simply give up doing what they love through fear.
My partner wouldn’t wilfully ignore signs to say a cycle race was going to take place and take her horse out at the times that she would know the event was on, because being responsible she knows that even a very steady horse that acts impeccably 99.99% of the time can at any instant behave irrationally, even with something very innocuous, if that means several hundred people on bikes plus cars are going to be on that same stretch of road she would either go out earlier or later or take it for a hack off road or do some jumps/trots etc on the training field next to the farm.
You should learn to read and understand what’s being said Mr. McCrapnugget.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
I did read what you wrote very carefully. I get that you have a crusade against the inappropriately lenient treatment of motorists who kill and injure others through negligence and wanton disregard for the safety of others. You are not wrong about that.
What I have called you out for is doing exactly what you accuse motorist sympathetic juries and judges of doing in apportioning blame to the victim for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time and then speculating that they must have had some bizarre ulterior motive. Simply because the offenders in this particular example are cyclists.
Just call this as it is, wrong is wrong and don’t attempt to conflate a horse rider being buzzed by morons on bicycles with unrelated incidents or hypothetical excursions onto a motorway hardshoulder.
There is a separate issue of
There is a separate issue of whether drivers are adequately held to account for inadequate / reckless / deliberate endangerment of cyclists (they are not).
In relation to this incident, though, the cyclists were not adequately considerate or observant. They could and should all have seen the horse and then moved out far enough to overtake it. In particular the tw*t that undertook the horse has no excuse.
Now everybody will tar actual
Now everybody will tar actual cyclists with the same brush. These are Triathletes. Idiots.
J90 wrote:
Triathletes are cyclists. Anyone on a bicycle is a cyclist. You, and those who state anything other than this, are cycling-snobs.
The deplorable incident that happened here is just as likely to have occured had the cyclists been in the front group of a sportive.
simonmb wrote:
The deplorable incident that happened here is just as likely to have occured had the cyclists been in the front group of a sportive.
— J90
Whoah there tiger, that is very dangerous talk.
if that is indeeds cyclings view / the reality, what does that mean for the future of public events such as sportives, races etc?
This is an extreme example of what can happen. The fact it doesn’t normally happen is why this example has achieved such publicity.
There are a couple of questions to be asked here in my opinion, which sit with the organiser;
– was signage / event publicity in the local community sufficient. The horse riders account suggests not, why was this the case?
– If on open roads, why were riders drafting, which I believe is not allowed in amateur triathlons? How was the non-drafting rule being so easily flouted?
Jimmy Ray Will wrote:
According to Human Race (interestingly enough, owned by TdF behemoth ASO), there was adequate signage erected days before the incident, which was increased at the time of the event. We have their word against the word of the horse rider, so who knows the truth, but they are a huge organisation and I would have expected them to have done this. They organise the Fred Whitton around these parts, and they put up warnings weeks in advance. Of course if you’re going around with your head up your arse, you won’t notice them (I’m not suggesting the rider was, by the way).
Drafting in a triathlon is allowed, but only for the time it takes to gain on your frontmarker and get past them. This is from a local events competitor notes:
“This race is a non-drafting race for all categories, meaning competitors are not allowed to take
shelter behind or beside another competitor or motor vehicle during the cycling segment of the
race. The draft zone is a rectangle measuring ten metres long by three metres wide, which surrounds every cycle on the cycle course.
The front edge of the front wheel defines the centre and top edge of the rectangle. A competitor
may enter the draft zone of another competitor but must be seen to be progressing through that zone. A maximum of 20 seconds is allowed to progress though the draft zone of another competitor. If an overtaking manoeuvre is not completed within 20 seconds, the overtaking cyclist must drop back. Time penalties and DQs will be issued by the referee for infringements.”
No-one seems to be using
No-one seems to be using their brain on this case. The style of (dangerous) riding by these triathletes simply doesn’t make sense. People are regarding this as if the triathletes have seen the horse and then chosen to be arseholes, when the truth is if they struck the horse they would be just as bad off as the horse/rider, probably worse.
The issue is that they were regarding this as a closed road race not expecting obstacles, clearly stem staring and not looking where they were going and then taking evasive action when spotting the horse whilst in a peloton.
I’d agree with Prosper0 that
I’d agree with Prosper0 that I’d doubt the riders just decided they didn’t need to give more room (unlike many motorists). I’m guessing that the riders in front only moved slightly and at the last second and everyone behind was just focused on the rider in front, which gave them no time to react properly. The riders that undertook might have seen that as the safest option they had left (since we don’t see rear video, it’s possible that any other option they thought they had in that split-second could have resulted in taking out other riders or running into the back of the horse).
This isn’t to say that they weren’t riding inappropriately (btw, wondering if this was a no-draft tri, in which case several of them would have been in violation) or that they should have been more concerned about the horse’s/rider’s safety rather than their bike split, but it could be that it’s getting blown a bit out of proportion. Hard to know for sure, but I can sympathize with those who are frustrated about how much publicity this is getting when no one was hurt compared to when vulnerable road users are seriously injured or killed by irresponsible drivers. When it becomes so common/normalized people don’t really care as much, I guess.
TBH the best thing possible
TBH the best thing possible in this situation is if they can’t identify the cyclist.* Not to minimize the situation, but there are people who would love to use this to bash the community, when (as has been pointed out) this sort of thing happens daily on the roads with close passes. If you can hit and kill a cyclist, lie about it and still avoid jail then this is nothing. The scales of justice need rebalancing.
*Unless there is a way of ‘triathloning’ through water I am unaware of, a triathlete is a swimmer, cyclist, and runner.
I’m confused, was this a
I’m confused, was this a triathlon race or not? I’m assuming it was a sanctioned race from what I’ve read, so my question is, and I hate to sound obvious here, but what the heck was a horse doing on a race event course? I don’t see anyone wondering about that little problem. I don’t see how this is any riders fault, you had a stream of bikes passing on the right which means there wasn’t enough room on the course for the riders and a horse so a couple riders took to the left of the horse due to no space. Instead of the cops looking at the rider they need to be looking at the race officials for not policing the course better and keeping horses off of it…or maybe looking at the police themselves who I think was their job to keep the cyclists safe by keeping people, cars, and HORSES off the course of course… This is crazy, I use to race and we never had to encounter anything because the police made sure the course was shut down to only cyclists, the only thing we would see on occasion was wild life, but someone isn’t riding and thus controlling a ground hog, or a snake, or whatever.
froze wrote:
It remained an open and public road. Regular rules of the road apllied throughout – to all users.
I’m confused why people can’t understand this.
simonmb wrote:
I’m confused as to why the roads weren’t closed for this sort of event, given it’s scale and the nature of the local roads/traffic. But that’s in the past.
I’m more baffled why people keep saying these cyclists/triathletes were drafting… It’s irrelevant and you can’t see enough to conclude that they were drafting anyway. Unless they are suggesting the horse was being drafted. Either way, WTF has unproven drafting got to do with anything here?
39 ponies killed in the New
39 ponies killed in the New Forest by motorists last year.
If TVP have time to
If TVP have time to investigate this, maybe they can “un-file” my recent case where a Porsche driver deliberately rammed me off my bike and then physically assaulted me… Apparently they cannot locate the vehicle or vehicle keeper, even though they have the driver’s description, reg number and the keeper’s address. Apparently the vehicle keeper moved without informing DVLA… Which I thought was a criminal offence in itself?