See the Van Nicholas Astraeus at Cycle 2008

Hi Bungle, I saw you follow-up comment. I can't imaging there's a tolerance of 4 seconds on camera enforced lights, seems an odd decision - an offence is committed if a vehicle starts crossing on a red, any tolerance is discretionary. There does seem to be some odd thinking about 'advanced stop lines' where the rules relating to them are identical to a regular stop line, as explained correctly elsewhere in the Highway Code. It does seem a regular offence. Where I live it doesn't help that some of them are very faint and disappear in rain.

@ktache Not sure he's totally ruled out of the worlds yet (though I think it would be best if he doesn't), normal recovery time is about eight weeks but surgery can halve that...depending on the nature of the break he could be just about fit to ride by the time of the elite men's race, but he'll have missed a lot of training. Hopefully his managers and team will persuade him to wait until Lombardia, if not just to knock it off for the rest of the year.

@Bungle_52 The Met told me a couple of years ago when rejecting a submission that they needed a clear three seconds of red visible before they would consider it for an RLJ prosecution. I pointed out to them that this meant that at 30 mph a driver could see a light change to red from 40 metres away and still get through without sanction, or 55 m if they accelerated to 40 as most do. They just replied "them's our rules..."

@Ben Graham I have just checked the footage from my report. The driver crosses the 1st stop line 4 seconds after the light turns red. All on camera from behind the vehicle. No further action. So I assume the margin is at least 4 seconds.

Oh, and active travel funding per head (in England at least) is laughable compared to other places. Plus it is delivered intermittently. It's more like a Blue Peter contest...

Yup, I see those opportunities being missed all the time in Edinburgh. When it gets really bad, dig it all up and put it back down again how it was. Contrast with what seems to happen in NL - when things are dug up the whole thing seems to get a "let's redo this according to the current standards" treatment. They even coordinate with the utilities, so that after a refurb the street isn't immediately dug up again because of leaking pipes / we suddenly realised the new estate being planned for round the corner will want broadband etc. Pros and cons of course - you may wait longer there for changes as smaller changes may be deferred until a major redo is due. (Though in the UK case you likely wouldn't get them at all...) It seems we "can't have nice things" in the UK in part because a) we have greater motor traffic speeds/volumes spead across "streets" / within urban areas b) the funding and organisational responsibility differs. Are we in the "Sam Vimes boots" territory (being too poor to afford better products which not only save money over time but actually work)? There is long term money pressure on LAs and it seems that due to poor construction and maintenance we have to regularly pour money into (pot-)holes in the road. And it seems there's no budget to check up on or enforce adequate standards from utilities work or even private building.

Shame about the world champs defence. Speedy recovery. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2026/aug/30/tadej-pogacar-vuelta-a-espana-cycling-crash-hospital-stage-nine

I believe the accepted form for this kind of argument is "I know you are, you said you were, but what am I?".

Woah. Deja vu.

Also the ability for drivers to see things is far worse as it's significantly obstructed by the frame of the vehicle.