Live blog: The Friday Leave/Remain poll, Scrapped HS2 cycleway would have provided five times the return on investment as the rail line; Deceuninck-QuickStep genitals training + more
SUMMARY
Deceuninck-QuickStep to train riders not to rub their genitals against waitresses
Earlier this week Belgian Deceuninck-QuickStep rider Iljo Keissewas was accused of rubbing his genitals on a waitress while she was having a photo taken with him and some team-mates.
He was thrown off the race and fined by a judge.
Team manager Patrick Lefevere was reportedly so incensed by the decision that he briefly threatened to withdraw the team from the race.
Several of the team’s riders then sat out Wednesday’s podium ceremony, citing ‘fatigue’.
Yesterday we reported that Keisse’s father said that the woman involved was partly to blame. Google Translate (perhaps unfairly) has one of his comments down as: “That woman is also very suggestive with her ass behind.”
Keisse, for what it’s worth, had already apologised.
None of this is a good look and Cycling News reports on “tensions” between the team and new title sponsor Deceuninck. Specialized has also said it is taking the matter “extremely seriously” and is “working with the team reinforce the expectations” it holds of riders.
All of which perhaps explains why the team has now issued a “sincere apology,” in which it promises to implement “specific conduct training protocols” to ensure “this kind of thing won’t happen again.”
“The Team would like to make a sincere apology for the events of the past few days, firstly to the woman involved in this regrettable incident, and additionally to all women, fans, and sponsors. We don’t condone this type of behaviour. Our team’s core values include mutual respect, and that was not upheld in this situation. Iljo also personally acknowledges his mistake and takes full responsibility for his actions.
“As a team, we are aware that one of our main roles is to educate the riders and make sure they demonstrate respect for everyone. The events of these past days are something which we can – and already have – learned from, and for that very reason we have decided to implement in the near future specific conduct training protocols for all riders and staff to ensure our values and make sure this kind of thing won’t happen again.
“Again, we are very sorry to everyone affected by this regrettable incident.”
TfL asks the public’s views on four major new cycle routes
Full consultation to follow.
Scrapped HS2 cycleway would have provided five times the return on investment as the rail line
Last year the government published a 2016 study which looked at the possibility of building a national cycleway along the route of the HS2 railway.
The gist was that it was an extremely good idea that neither the Department for Transport (DfT) nor HS2 Ltd, the company building the high-speed line, were willing to fund.
“Sadly the HS2 cycleway train has left the platform,” observed Roger Geffen, Cycling UK’s policy director.
Our erstwhile colleague Laura Laker reports in the Guardian that a 50-page business case for the cycleway put the health, congestion and economic benefits at between £3 and £8 per £1 spent.
The return on investment of the HS2 rail line is £1.5-£1.7 per £1, according to the National Audit Office.
What snow?
Soooo… who rode in and is the only person in the office? pic.twitter.com/d7pMHrdSuX
— road.cc (@roadcc) February 1, 2019
Did you still make it to the office this morning? Show us your pics!
UK Cycling Expert, bang on the money
He only complained about it to try to get more money. pic.twitter.com/f8yetNXcPa
— UK Cycling Expert (@ukcyclingexpert) January 31, 2019
Cyclist defies polar vortex to set new course record in Arrowhead 135
Not that guy. He’s another competitor who did a better job of illustrating the conditions.
Preview of the World CX Champs course
Rising British U23 star Cameron Mason takes us around the very fast course for the World Cyclocross Championships. Tomorrow’s races are available on the UCI’s YouTube channel, but the main races tomorrow are geo-blocked as they’re on Eurosport Player.
Leave or Remain?
Leave or remain? That seems to be the only thing getting asked these days. So we thought we’d jump on that particular bandwagon. It’s just a bit of fun. Unlike the other thing.
Call for congestion/pollution charges to be applied to black cabs
“Even ambulances have to pay the pollution charge.”
More here (including a petition).
Looking to lose some Winter weight? (rough translation from the French)
Vous avez pris un peu de poids pendant l’hiver ? Pas de panique : nous avons LA solution ! pic.twitter.com/jGaHKKWAWz
— Dans la Musette (@DansLaMusette) February 1, 2019
*Warranty possibly voided
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.
19 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
If we don't fight it now, we'll all end up forced to wear baggy shorts!
@Rendel Harris Agree, I am baffled that the 84 year old who is now banned from driving for year can then start driving again without a retest. We should be re-tested regularly.
@mitsky Just checking the figures and apparently the 2026 average cost is £58,000 per year per prisoner; worth noting that is only the direct cost, you then have to factor in ten years of lost tax income from the prisoner, ten years that the prisoner is making no contribution to society as a worker or as a consumer, plus the fact that if they were the primary breadwinner very likely the costs will include benefits for their family as well. None of which should be a reason for keeping violent recidivists out of prison of course, nor drug/drink drivers who kill, but it is a factor worth considering for lower-level offences.
@Surreyrider I ride in Surrey a fair bit and absolutely many do look like that but the point is they all *think* they're driving perfectly reasonably (as one discovers when remonstrating with someone who's skimmed one by 30cm, "I gave you masses of room") so deterrent penalties have little effect. That's why we need to strike at the root cause and actually train drivers properly and test them stringently (and more than once over the course of a potential 70+ years of driving, it's absolutely absurd that competence and knowledge in what for most people is the activity in their life that will run the biggest risk of killing people you never have to have your qualifications renewed).
@mitsky Imprisonment currently costs over £50k p.a. per prisoner and obviously that will rise over the course of a ten-year stretch with inflation. Regarding culpability and mitigating sentences etc, of course I'm not against condign punishment for drivers who kill (and cyclists on the tiny, tiny handful of occasions when this happens), including prison as appropriate; I was objecting to the ridiculous and oft-repeated demand of MM that drivers who kill cyclists must get ten years, "no excuses, no exceptions".
Hey, but their wool blend cycling adjacent t-shirts are/were fantastic.
@Surreyrider Still the boss. Ride one, you'll see why
@Smoggysteve "Most would happily ride on the roads and be treated with respect by drivers". But people aren't - and as far as I can see they won't be. Not until there is a lot less driving and it's slower around cyclists, and far more people driving have "skin in the game" eg. they sometimes cycle and their friends and family do also. That's what leads to the model - which is perhaps most advanced in NL - where cycling, walking and driving are all seen as separate normal transport modes. Their needs, vulnerabilities and any dangers to others are considered. And *that* leads to "mix / share when possible, separate when necessary". But "possible" is "where your 10-year old would be safe to cycle unsupervised" - so very few motor vehicles, going slow! And AFAICS everybody - even "existing cyclists" - is happy with the result. (I dunno about a few pro cyclists - but don't they tend to have training camps in different counties anyway?)
@quiff as an Edinburgh resident I can confidently say he's speaking without moving his lips in one sense: - while as I noted in a separate comment there *is* now some real separated cycle infra, all the examples i can think of have *at least as much space* for pedestrians. The rest of the "cycle infra" is essentially similar to the situation in the rest of the UK: eg. bus lanes*, cycle lanes and shared use paths (eg. "build" infra by sticking up a sign). Edinburgh is one of the places with a moderately extensive network of former railways which have been converted to "shared use" paths (completely motor traffic few). However though shared they are not narrow by UK standards. And this is all effectively a "free extra" for all non- motorised users, not like the "sign a cycle path" where pedestrians do lose space. I think this all comes from the "popular understanding" of cycling in which ultimately cyclists are the "other". They don't fit "motor vehicle" or "pedestrian" (including wheelchairs on the very rare occasions people think about that). Thus "cyclists are cheating" in multiple ways! They shouldn't get their own space as "there aren't enough" of them. And "they can just use the road / path". But being able to *choose* "on the road" or "on the footway" (shared use path) is clearly unfair - nobody else gets to do that! BUT of course even if they did pick just one of road OR pedestrian space it's still not fair anyway because they're "too slow" for the road (don't pay "road tax" etc...) and "far too fast" for pedestrians... * Though some existing cyclists may appreciate them when there are few buses, buses and bikes are a very poor mix for several reasons.
Whilst a shame for any employees, their bib shorts had the worst chamois pad I’d ever encountered, utter waste of my money. Even though they were Strava challenge discount purchases, still a waste of money.
19 thoughts on “Live blog: The Friday Leave/Remain poll, Scrapped HS2 cycleway would have provided five times the return on investment as the rail line; Deceuninck-QuickStep genitals training + more”
Quote:
IT’S POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GONE MAD!
What is the world coming to when you can’t even rub your genitals against a waitress anymore, because of the PC-Thought-Police, bleedin’ ‘ealth ‘n’ safety, the EU, and Gary Lineker (probably).
“Deceuninck-QuickStep to
“Deceuninck-QuickStep to train riders not to rub their genitals against waitresses”
Headline of the year.
I blame his helmet.
I blame his helmet.
The HS2 figures for return on
The HS2 figures for return on investment, of 1:1.5, only stand up if you make some very questionable assumptions about the benefits e.g. that time on a train is non-productive, which is clearly not true. All the independent analyses of HS2 say it is not an economic proposition.
On the contrary, the benefits of providing for cyclists are solid and unquestionable, and even with the skewed system, are vastly better value than major road and rail schemes.
So which ones get funded?
Answers on a postcard to your local MP.
burtthebike wrote:
The ones that allow wealthy people who bought a slightly cheaper house out in the country so they could afford to buy another house somewhere sunny to commute to their Very Important office job in a hedge fund or bank in the City.
(Sorry, I might be generalising a bit there and being unfair to someone in pinstripes
).
brooksby wrote:
Yes, because everyone who uses the WCML is wealthy, has a hedge fune, or works in the city, don’t they………….
Bungle73 wrote:
We’re talking about hs2, though. Pay way more money to get to London five minutes faster… I don’t know about the west coast main line, but hs2 damn well *is* aimed at wealthy businesspersons.
brooksby wrote:
The purpose of HS2 is to releive pressure from the WCML, which has severe capcity problems. Like most people, you crictise the building of HS2 without even knowimg why it is being built.
Bungle73 wrote:
The only valid reason I’ve heard for building HS2 is to provide the tories donors with lots of profit. If it was a decision based on value for money, it wouldn’t be happening, but a proper national, regional and local cycle network would. The decision to build it was clearly not based on economics, or wider benefits.
burtthebike wrote:
You have a very short memory. HS2 was the brainchild of the last Labour government. The Tories mistake was not scrapping it.
fizrar6 wrote:
My memory is fine, and the last labour government wasn’t labour; it was tory with a pink rinse.
Bungle73 wrote:
That would be “relieve pressure” by moving the people in the first class carriages onto a dedicated super speed permanently first class rail line? How does that disprove my point??
burtthebike wrote:
the problem is building a cycling scheme would not occupy the many thousands of construction workers/builders/architects etc for the best part of a decade at a time, these big infrastructure projects like HS2 or CrossRail, are as much about providing reasonably medium term employment prospects for lots and lots of people, and all the subsidiary support business around it. Thats where the real ROI comes from in terms of the governments spend on them, these people get paid a wage they can live on, they pay tax, they spend money back in the economy, it all creates economic growth.
That these things when constructed eventually are ultimately often marginal in terms of actual cost benefit,well youll have had a decade of near guaranteed growth in the construction industry by then, who will have then moved on to the next big government funded mega building project and the whole merry go round starts again.
Awavey wrote:
You are undoubtedly right, but a national cycle network, with regional and local segments, would provide more employment for longer and be vastly more beneficial in all areas, including financial.
So why isn’t that funded? I think the answer is that HS2 and other mega-projects are ego schemes for the politicians, who love to be able to point at something and claim the credit e.g. channel tunnel. Transport is one of the few areas where politicians can have a fairly direct effect, unlike most other areas of public policy. Although cycling is a vote winner according to all the polls, it’s still a bit too tree-hugging leftie for most politicians, and rail and road have powerful and vocal supporters.
Seems to me that Keisse’s
Seems to me that Keisse’s genitals have been blown way out of proportion.
Hmmm…. maybe I could have phrased that better.
It’s 2019. It’s quite simple
It’s 2019. It’s quite simple. Don’t rub your genitals, or even pretend to, against anyone who hasn’t specifically given their consent for you to do so.
On the other hand, I’m in no way denying the stupidity of the act by saying that it was clearly intended as a bit of a joke that has gone down like a lead balloon. John Cleese once said that an Englishman would rather be told that he is a bad lover than that he has so sense of humour; well, about a hundred thousand people have told Keisse that his attempt at humour sucks, so surely that should be punishment enough?
And never mind that in a sport that still has podium girls at almost all races, and continues to belittle and underfund the women’s side of the sport, there are an awful lot of people sat in glass houses throwing stones.
Leave/Remain; isn’t there a
Leave/Remain; isn’t there a third way? Just coast by seeing if they look productively engaged in a repair, and if not call out ‘Y’alright?’
Organon wrote:
Seems sensible, so I doubt parliament will vote for it…
Organon wrote:
I normally try to Leave, but just end up cutting my own throat and bleeding to death.