Please note that our live blog can sometimes be slow to load. If you’re having problems, please refresh your browser or, if you are on a mobile device, switch to the classic version of the site.
Live blog: Chris Boardman says “Too many in Westminster do not consider cycling important” as fallout continues from Conservative Party’s “dangerous cycling” tweet + more
All the news from the site and beyond as we start a new week
Mon, Aug 13, 2018 14:14
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 £1.99. 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.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
25 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
gadsby06 4 hours ago
Are you sure they weren't overshoes?
GravelIsNothingNew 6 hours ago
Winning GC is irrelevant, what a relief. The best thing about knowing Pogacar will most likely win GC, is that it frees us to focus on all the more interesting aspects the mountainous chess game that is the TDF. The real challenge for all (riders, teams and spectators) will be the hot weather. This might be the last TDF to be ridden in the heat of the afternoon. There will also likely be major climate protests against the rampant sports washing by fossil fuel corporate sponsors that defiantly continue as the core funding strategy of pro cycling, despite all evidence that their products are endangering the health of the greatest grandstand in all sport. Corporate surveillance and AI will not be far behind for protestors in coming years (if not this year), as a world on fire impacted by corporate greed and wilful ignorance towards the human rights of all earths citizens begins to bite; all whist cycling through some of the planets most glorious and endangered lands. The irony is palpable and the suspension of public disbelief seems about to crack. The onus is on the UCI to shift policy. Protests and epic TDF crowds could yet be the deciding factor in 2026.
ktache 6 hours ago
I had very much enjoyed his rides around Birmingham previously.
ktache 7 hours ago
A fine career from a great rider, backed by an exceptional team. I hope that we haven't lost him completely from the world of cycling. There were a few solo breakaways, when and where I cannot recall, but they were just great and for me unexpected.
ktache 7 hours ago
The LBS had a few copies of this when I had to pop in a few weeks back, needed a new rim, grrr. It piqued my interest, I like exploring the Chilterns and beyond and I love cake. Almost purchased. But noticed that the ride description wasn't up to what I liked, and the maps are all navigation app based, not really suited to a luddite such as myself. So I'm going to have to stick to my 1p very tatty copy of Nick Cotton's 24 one-day routes in Berks, Bucks & Oxfordshire. Much less cake based mind, but suited to the way I ride, that and a few local OS explorers.
StevenCrook 8 hours ago
"Continental’s GP5000 S TR tyres are a stable in the pro peloton" Really? A stable? There's a thing...
mdavidford 8 hours ago
It's trying to gazump everyone else in the claim to be 'the fastest bike ever' - what's faster than a bike that can only exist in a particle accelerator?
Simon Withers 8 hours ago
The writer's name is Ty (handy synchronicity for Ti ) Rutherford, hence Rf. I'd have to have a bike made of an alloy of silicon and tungsten, which does exist, but it's apparently used in computer chips rather than bike frames. Hey ho.
Xenophon2 9 hours ago
Very interesting, thank you for sharing! Hope you enjoy the bike! Have to ask though, I get the Ti as it’s a titanium frame. But why Rf, a notoriously unstable synthetic and highly radioactive element?
MichaelWinnerRIP 9 hours ago
I’m surprised by some of the comments here. I’ve always found Le Col kit pretty decent, from Pro Aqua Zero jerseys to their bib shorts, especially the Pro range.
25 thoughts on “Live blog: Chris Boardman says “Too many in Westminster do not consider cycling important” as fallout continues from Conservative Party’s “dangerous cycling” tweet + more”
Who do they *think* are the
Who do they *think* are the most vulnerable road users?
(Perhaps its those delicate little HGVs – I mean, a crushed bike frame could leave a nasty scratch in the paintwork if it got caught under a wheel arch…).
I just hope they
I just hope they (Conservatives) put as much energy into introducing laws to protect people living in tower blocks run by unscrupulous landlords. But yeah, forget Grenfell and lets target cyclists.
Here’s a little ‘Ready
Here’s a little ‘Ready Reckoner’ to provide some comparisons of the kinetic energy of bikes & cars at a range of speeds.
The highlighted cells demonstrate that a cyclist needs to be traveling at 80mph to match a car trundling along at 20.
Close pass someone at 80 on a cycle path and they’d probably be outraged, perform the same pass in a car at 20 in a car park & they’d think it ‘normal’ – Odd!
p.s – I’m more than happy to be corrected on my ‘workings out’
pps – Have you heard of the constipated mathmagician? – She worked it out with a pencil….
HowardR wrote:
80/20 ok, though the ridder has gained an extra 10 kg (perhaps from a refuel!)
hirsute wrote:
Thats, ahem! based on my own chips & beer intake & judging by the 10 + 80 = 100 & “ridder” – too much of the beer…. (not two selv – choke details)
HowardR wrote:
I actually think 1600kg is pretty low considering the number of ‘crossovers’ (god I hate that term) and suv type vehicles around now, add in the number with 4 wheel drive and it could well be another 200-400kg more, and that’s just for the cars, before you even get to vans and HGVs etc.
The other point people seem to foget about when they complain about the speed of cyclists (no wonder the uk has had recent success in the sport as apparently we’re all riding around at over 30mph if a lot of the complaints are to be believed) is braking, a bike will decellerate quite quickly, and with it’s already reduced mass even slight reductions in speed will remove a considerable amount of kinetic energy. A car with great brakes and an alert driver may have a greater rate of retardation and will possibly out brake a cyclist, but the chances of them bringing the vehicle down to a speed where the kinetic energy is going to be less lethal is pretty remote.
But by all means, get those dangerous nonagenarians off the road, what menaces they must have been for the last 80 years…
So, in and around the village
So, in and around the village near Bristol in which I live(d) – just moved. Over the past two years, 3 pedestrians and a cyclist died on the roads.
2 of the pedestrians were killed by cars; one car didn’t stop at a junction and the other car went straight across a zebra crossing. The other pedestrian died after a lorry drove through a red light at a pedestrian crossing.
The cyclist was killed by a car that hit them from behind.
I regularly cycle(d) from where I live(d) to Bristol, cycling straight through the city centre. Many of the cyclists were appallingly behaved, as were many of the motorists and, in fact, pedestrians. In the few years I commute in and around Bristol, I saw a few pedestrians hit by vehicles, one was fatal. I also saw 2 cyclists hit by vehicles (one was entirely the cyclist’s fault for riding like a total idiot, literally road into a bus).
I also saw several collisions between pedestrians and bicycles, mostly caused by both parties being totally unaware of each other. I also hit 2 pedestrians, one was on their phone and stepped into traffic without looking, the other ran across the road at a pedestrian crossing (when the light was green for the road traffic & red for pedestrians) – neither pedestrian was hurt, the Iphone & coffee of the first pedestrian didn’t fare so well.
To protect vulnerable road users, pedestrians and cyclists need adequate room from motor vehicles (and each other). The stats speak for themselves, motor vehicles are killing people. Despite this cyclists and pedestrians are causing some problems but in the order of 1% of total deaths (from the gov stats of road deaths).
The amount of untaxed, uninsured and un-MOT’d (is that even a word?) vehicles is horrendous. Drink, drug and phone driving are also big problems.
Cycling laws need updating to the 21st century, all road laws do – but it won’t do anything to protect vulnerable road users (which is sad because I prefer walking and cycling to driving).
And the shame is, the story
And the shame is, the story just before the Conservative one is about a 95 year old couple retiring their tandem because of bad drivers and near misses. I think this sums up the problems on our roads. I ought to say, there are a lot of courteous drivers out there but the few idiots make life miserable for everyone.
Well, as a Green, I know
Well, as a Green, I know which party to vote for, but for anyone in doubt, vote anyone except tory. They are interested in one thing, money, and the safety of cyclists and pedestrians doesn’t matter as long as their mates in car making and road building get to make even more.
BTW, Jeremy Vine was wrong:
“1. When I’m on a bike, I’m a vulnerable road user.
2. The people in this photo don’t look like criminals to me, they look like they’re following the govt and Mayor of London’s advice to cycle
3. In 2016 there were 1,700 road deaths; THREE were caused by cyclists.”
It isn’t clear that the three deaths were caused by the cyclists, but they were involved.
burtthebike wrote:
Chris refers to “Westminster” and he’s right to. “Anyone but Tory” is terrible advice if you’re serious about making the pols do anything for cycling. Don’t give your vote to the other 1.1 major parties who also don’t give a fuck about cyclists’ safety on the roads, just because they’re not the Tories. Their records are all lamentable.
srchar wrote:
2 likes
Not sure about that, and I think that this is the worst government in my life for cycling, if I may dignify this shower of s**t with that epithet. Full of promises and lots of words appreciating all the benefits of cycling, but no investment and lots more road building. Oh, and an investigation into dangerous cycling. The tories give hypocrites a bad name.
Just nipped on to the ‘daily
Just nipped on to the ‘daily heil’ to see some funny comments for the tory tweet story.. came away not laughing as expected, but actually really quite sad 🙁
peted76 wrote:
Why would you do that to yourself? No problem has ever been solved by anyone commenting below the line.
The fact that the tweet was
The fact that the tweet was published gives us real insight to the way cycling is viewed by some within Government, if not all. Jesse Norman can apologise all he likes but it’s a clear message.
Is whoever authorised the tweet losing their job over this?
ChrisB200SX wrote:
You might be right. A bit like the comments made by one Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, is this a case of testing the political waters and seeing if they can get away with it..?
brooksby wrote:
Any news is better for the government than coverage of Brexit. Theresa May will get caught eating a baby next week, just to keep it off the front page.
vonhelmet wrote:
Yep. And it’s a good job Jezza went to a cemetery 4 years ago, cos that’s what the Heil reasoned should keep EVERYTHING off the front page today.
davel wrote:
Apparently there were nine, NINE! pages of it. This country has now drifted so far to the right, we might need a revolution to restore normality.
burtthebike wrote:
Revolution, you say?
vonhelmet wrote:
Wasnt it Johnson himself who talked about dead cats? Throw one on the table in the middle of a meeting and it becomes the thing that everyone talks about. We are that dead cat.
So sad that the 95 year old
So sad that the 95 year old couple have had to give up tandem riding because of bad drivers.
Reading their life story proves how much people can do and how much they can enjoy life using only sustainable transport.
Unfortunately the government’s current policy of demonising cyclists can only ensure that fewer people than ever feel safe enough to do so in future.
Very odd that the Tory tweet
Very odd that the Tory tweet shows very normal cycling on a cycle route in daylight but with additional hi viz and lights.
I’m launching a consultation
Norman! I’m launching a consultation between my boot and your ass!
An even remotely well
An even remotely well maintained car will outbrake a cyclist. A car will stop from 20mph much quicker than a bike. Official tables say there’s 6m thinking and 6m stopping distance in a car. The problem you have is that in a lot of cases the thinking distance ends up being about 400m because drivers are looking at their phones.
vonhelmet wrote:
This. A car has massively more rubber in contact with the road and is much more stable than a bicycle under braking.
Having said that, I reckon I could still manage to stop the bike within the distances quoted in the (rather outdated) braking distance tables.