Please be patient with our sometimes slow-loading live blog. Try refreshing the page if it’s slowed to a standstill.
- News

Live blog: Protected cycle lane or dooring zone? Protest planned against car ban on Cheltenham’s Boots Corner, 2019 La Course by Tour de France will consist of just one multi-lap race, road rage cyclist jabs his bike into Mercedes bonnet + more

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.
33 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@Paul J More information has come out today which indicates that the riders did not believe that the conditions were fine, apparently a lot of the roads were extremely slippery (this seems to have been a problem throughout the race, presumably due to dust caused by the excessive heat) and so the many hairpins had become hazardous. Secondly the riders felt that the nature of the circuit made it impossible for any riders suffering a crash or mechanical to get back on as the peloton would be so strung out and it would take so long for assistance to reach anyone in need. Decathlon rider Sander de Pestel told journalists that in his opinion a GC rider wouldn't be able to get back on even if they had an incident at 40 km to go. Take that with a pinch of salt or not as you wish but those two sound like quite legitimate reasons for the riders to be concerned.
@Chris RideFar ..... and the first thing they do is crank that throttle all the way! WHOO HOO!!! Look at me go!!!
I wish I could commute to work but my house is 5000' above where I work :-( That's 1500 meters for you metric types. Good article.
I'm honestly amazed that horse riders dare take to our country roads. I have no idea what the actual statistics on collisions are but they are very slow moving, often 2 abreast and generally on the little twisty turny country lanes. With the way far too many people drive on these tiny roads, I wouldn't dare be on a horse on them. On my weekend ride this week a pickup driver (shocker eh) nearly crashed into a poor lady head on because he simply couldn't wait until it was safe to overtake. Poor womans ABS kicked in and she had to go into the side of the road to avoid him as he barrelled on through and she still only missed him by inches I reckon. All because too many people don't care. If he hits her he will have a crash on his insurance but he almost certainly wouldn't be banned despite it being a fucking braindead overtake that he clearly does as a matter of course. He is a danger on our roads but we will never treat him as one until he kills or seriously hurts someone and we can prove he was completely at fault. Even then it will have been a "one off" according to his lawyer. A lapse. About 2 minutes after this near miss a BMW flies past me giving me plenty of space and gently drifts back over to our side of the road. He was going about 45 and was on the wrong side of the road going around a blind corner while he drifted back in. If someone else doing the same speed was coming around that bend he would have binned it into the hedge or hit them. The mind just boggles. Absolutely zero reason he didn't pull back in faster. Just didn't occur to him I assume. This is why it scares me on our country roads. Far too many drivers who are just fundamentally dangerous, bad drivers.
There needs to be a change in the language used when reporting on things like this. If there is ever an incident involving a cyclist it is very much dehumanised. Cyclist = Inanimate object. Not a human being, with family and loved ones. its all so easy to make them look more like a statistic. The more people who understand that cyclists are real people just trying to live their lives and and not just an obstacle or inconvenience then we might have people treating them the way you would wish to be treated.
@OnYerBike Hmm, and when I click the links to "preferred partners" for a small sample of items, they are not found on the preferred partners sites. So... seems it is now defunct too, as you surmise.
If the riders want a parade lap, then let the organisers set an officially neutralised parade lap. If some of the riders just don't want to race, then that's between them. They don't get to badger the organisers to neutralise the end of the race. And anyway, if they take final GC times at X km to go, that just sets the race to end at X km to go. If a GC rider really wanted to, they could try attack before then (course, it would lack the course feature advantageous for getting away that the riders wanted excluded.. but still). The riders trying to bring in safety, when conditions were fine and the circuit was also fine, is just going to undermine their voice in the future when they try bring up safety the next time. Stupid.
@james-o Yes. The mountain bikers are still breaking the law. I saw two more yesterday.
@james-o Yes. The mountain bikers are still breaking the law. I saw two more yesterday.
@panda I don't think there would be a problem with maintaining a GC truce, because it only has to be maintained until the times are taken. In the case of Paris, everyone could ride in fairly easy, couple of parade laps up and down the Champs, times taken, and then if after that Pogacar wants to tow Del Toro round three laps of Montmartre, or indeed go for the stage himself, no worries. I too am of the generation when the organisers held that sort of sway, nothing like as important now when 90% plus of the top riders' salaries come from the team rather than prize money, indeed I believe it's customary for the winner nowadays to give their prize money away to the rest of the team. This is, I believe, a good thing; although rider power can sometimes appear a bit excessive in its demands (the main reason for asking for neutralisation yesterday, as explained by the rider representative, seemed to be "we're all knackered", which was pretty ridiculous) at least organisers can no longer dictate that they must go on in dangerous circumstances. As they were saying on commentary yesterday, what they need to do is for the rider representatives and the organisers to get together as soon as, or even before, the route is announced and iron out any problems then instead of waiting until the eve of the stage or even, as in stage of the Giro this year, to complain about the parcours while it is in progress.
33 thoughts on “Live blog: Protected cycle lane or dooring zone? Protest planned against car ban on Cheltenham’s Boots Corner, 2019 La Course by Tour de France will consist of just one multi-lap race, road rage cyclist jabs his bike into Mercedes bonnet + more”
Best Daily Heil comment of
Best Daily Heil comment of the day ref that ‘crazed cyclst’..
‘If that lycra g i mp came it with me I’d r oger him up the b um, teach him a lesson.’
LOLZ!
Can we have a whip-around and
Can we have a whip-around and raise some money for a case of beer for this cyclist? And the one in Liverpool a month or so back.
That junction is outside
That junction is outside Borough Station. The van driver was in left turn only lane and cut across to go straight ahead.
A few things stand out here:
1) The van driver states that he sees this cyclist every morning. Is he saying that he drives that same route every morning yet he still doesn’t understand the road layouts? That’s concerning. And even having had the hindsight of this incident and research the local road layouts….he *still* agreed for this video to be published! Is he that thick?
2) Despite his dangerous manoeuvre, he does his window down to shout at the cyclist – whilst driving a van.
3) He pulls in front of the cyclist with his van in order to stop him.
4) The media picks up on the scratched paint and runs with the destructive cyclist headline. He shouldn’t have done it but the bigger crime is driving a 2 ton van with no awareness of road layouts, no awareness of right of way, and driving without due care and attention.
The cyclist’s behaviour is wrong but I can’t help feel it’s a sympton of how cyclists are treated.
no suprise that the video
no suprise that the video fails to show how the guys bike ended up virtually under the front of the van.
cyclists dont just go attacking people for the hell of it, we know its wrong but sometime when you fear for your life, you get frustrated with people who just doint give a shit
I notice we see none of the
I notice we see none of the video of the run-up to this incident and what might have provoked the response…
Ah, more video at the link. I
Ah, more video at the link. I like the bit where the driver keeps saying, “It’s on camera,” as if he thinks that will support his claim that he didn’t drive alongside him shouting at him or cut the cyclist up and force him to stop.
rkemb wrote:
Which link? I can’t find anything with the full video?
LastBoyScout wrote:
The London Evening Standard link below the clip above:
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/moment-cyclist-smashes-56000-mercedes-with-his-bike-in-road-rage-fury-a3970106.html
Starts with the extract here but then shows the 60s or so leading up to it.
rkemb wrote:
Just watched that version. Gosh – that escalated quickly, didn’t it?!
(So, I think that the Merc driver pulled over in front of, or on top of, the cyclist, for no apparent reason and then decided to try and deny everything. Lots of “It’s on camera!” even though the car’s camera showed absolutely zip – since it was pointing forward and all the juicy stuff was off at the side (I think). Merc driver was in the wrong lane at the junction/lights, but without actually seeing what was going on ‘off camera’ I can’t really decide on whether or not ‘throwing a bike at the car’ was or was not an overreaction…
)
rkemb wrote:
Certainly makes more sense from the full length video. Cannot condone the behaviour of the cyclist involved but in my opinion the van driver spent £1500 on a lesson about picking on another road user equally as aggressive as himself.
rkemb wrote:
Certainly makes more sense from the full length video. Cannot condone the behaviour of the cyclist involved but in my opinion the van driver spent £1500 on a lesson about picking on another road user equally as aggressive as himself.
Terrible driving by van
Terrible driving by van driver, bad reaction from cyclist. Who’d want to commute in London every day and start your day stressed up to the eyeballs!
tigersnapper wrote:
It’s more stressful driving than cycling, in my experience. Hence so many drivers trying to get you.
tigersnapper wrote:
Seriously, I cycle over 20miles a day in London, but I’ve never got close to getting this stressed! Ok, so the driver was a dick and in the wrong lane, but part of the joy of cycling in a city is you can just continue on you way, leaving idiots like this stuck in traffic (that’s why they get wound up).
a1white wrote:
Likewise. I ride all over town and have very little difficulty with drivers. I tend to choose quieter routes (another advantage of cycling is that these are often quicker anyway) but it’s generally not a stressful experience. And I see few of the sort of episodes in the video.
Indeed it’s probably better than many smaller places where the roads are narrower, motor traffic perhaps faster, and drivers don’t expect / aren’t used to / apparently have difficulty seeing cyclists.
Plus as a1white says, you’re generally faster than they are!
Duncann wrote:
It’s six of one and half a dozen of the other, as the saying goes. Take the main ‘A’ ‘roads into London and you’ll get the Audi, BMW and Mercedes drivers passing you four inches from your right elbow, at speeds up to 85 mph. Take the quieter roads, and it’s a foregone conclusion that there is no CCTV and less chance of witnesses, so you’re going to get bullied and threatened.
Legs_Eleven_Worcester wrote:
That’s really not what I meant / my experience.
a1white wrote:
That’s a bit like saying that people shooting at you shouldn’t bother you all that much, as long as they keep missing you.
“He alleged that the cyclist
“He alleged that the cyclist deliberately collided with his vehicle and when he confronted him, pulling up alongside him near a curb, the cyclist abused him and assaulted him.”
There are numerous problems with that statement. How likely is it that a cyclist would deliberately collide with a van… and then get upset with the driver about it?
Drive dangerously around a cyclist and attempt to hurt them, then cry assualt when the tables are turned, pathetic, he wasn’t so big when he got out of his “£56,000” taxivan thing. I love the way the bystander reacts to the random offer of a handshake, says it all about the driver.
This really is a case of the driver getting what he deserved, hopefully he’ll learn from it and drive better in future, one can only hope.
Curious that its only the
Curious that its only the edited/shortened clip which supports the “psycho cyclist” narrative which went viral and nothing showing why the cyclist might be so angry…
brooksby wrote:
We all know that people will only put out what suits their own personal agenda, changes will be made in that one day this video will be sufficient while the next they’ll be demanding all sorts of supporting evidence. It’s the way of the world. Facts, truth and consistency have nothing to do with anything.
don simon wrote:
hawkinspeter wrote:
Or, I suppose
I don’t think the Deliveroo
I don’t think the Deliveroo drivers/riders will be too bothered about the driving ban in Cheltenham if the ones around here are anything to go by.
One way street? Not if it’s quicker for me…
Cycle path? Isn’t my motorbike a sort of cycle, it’s a bike, isn’t it?
Amber light? Foot down.
ASL? Opportunity to gain a couple of meters having fucked up while trying to beat the amber light.
Pedestrian crossing? I’ve got someones lunch/diner here you selfish bastard!
No left turn? Only applies to you.
Across the pavement? Naturally.
Hey, I’ve got to earn a living, so I’m fully justified in risking your life.
Smashes?
Smashes?
Mercvan taxi man has been on
Mercvan taxi man has been on the radio calling for number plates for bicycles whilst explaining why as a professional driver he was not going to wait in a queue of traffic when he could cut up the inside in the wrong lane, and that was perfectly safe!
Hope the police take into consideration his tailgating of the cyclist, use of the horn, distracted driving, possible forcing of cyclist off the road and parking on a yellow line.
The Mercvan man claims to be
The Mercvan man claims to be a professional driver, a chauffer no less, and that he was assaulted. If that standard of driving is acceptable from a professional driver, there is something wrong with the qualification system for being a professional, and I didn’t see any actual assault on him, unless pointing your finger in someone’s face is an assault. Mind you, I reckon driving your car at a cyclist qualifies as assault.
I hope his employers made him pay for the damage his appalling driving and infantile attitude caused.
burtthebike wrote:
Assault is the threat to apply force, so technically waving your finger in someone’s face could well be assault, particularly if you were shouting threatening things. The driver batted the guys hand anyway, so he clearly felt threatened…
Mind you, driving aggressively at someone could equally qualify under the strict definition. Good luck with getting anyone to take that case, though.
[/quote]Assault is the threat to apply force….
[/quote]
Common Assault – s39 Criminal Justice Act 1988: reads as follows: An offence of Common Assault is committed when a person either assaults another person or commits a battery. An assault is committed when a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force.
No mention of threat. Probably an action more likely to contrave s5 of the Public Order Act versus what seems to be a case of Dangerous Driving.
That cycle lane in Trafford
That cycle lane in Trafford is utterly ridiculous, and if I lived there I would be demanding to see the documents about its design and the safety audit. It isn’t just an accident waiting to happen, an accident is guaranteed, if you can call something with such complete lack of attention to safety an accident. Either the parking lane needs to be the width of a car door farther out, or the bollards need to be a continuous fence, preventing passengers opening their door into the cycle lane.
If any cyclist is injured in a collision because a car door was opened into their path, it would appear inevitable that the council which designed and constructed this utterly abysmal death trap would be sued. Perhaps then they’ll design it right, but why is it even possible that such a clear and obvious danger could be conceived, designed and constructed without someone noticing that they had screwed it up so comprehensively that a one-eyed ameoba with astigmatism could see it?
I’m paraphrasing. If the
I’m paraphrasing. If the victim apprehends the infliction of force, then that means the perpetrator is threatening to apply it.
Bedides, the legal definition is arguably even looser than my shorthand.
As a Cheltenham resident, the
As a Cheltenham resident, the changes are good, yes there has been some displacement. But the town centre is a far nicer place. Obviously drivers are going to moan, and if you go on facebook there are plenty. However Cheltenham is a fairly small town and fairly flat. Infact a pretty ideal place, in theory, for cycling and walking about. The town does have a pollution issue, so car use needs to be reduced, and no matter how many carrots you offer the only way to reduce car use is a stick.
If you keep on pandering to drivers then you are never going to get people out of cars. The reports from the council, which match my observations, are town centre footfall up, cycling up and bus usage up.
There is no such time as 12pm
There is no such time as 12pm (or 12am for that matter).