Can you laugh at yourself? Good, because you're probably in here somewhere, even if it's as a roadie cameo. Every once in a while we see a video that makes both cyclists and non-cyclists spit their coffee over the keyboard and have a good old belly laugh. Chapeau to Sons of Science for a beautifully observed paean to the city cyclist. The lyrics are on the YouTube page for the vid. for the sake of your NSFW filter, we won't print them here.
A lovely song about bikes. NSFW.
No greenhouse gas, a tiny carbon footprint up your ass…
Thu, Mar 08, 2012 20:07
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.
Dave is a founding father of road.cc, having previously worked on Cycling Plus and What Mountain Bike magazines back in the day. He also writes about e-bikes for our sister publication ebiketips. He’s won three mountain bike bog snorkelling World Championships, and likes to ride increasingly long audaxes decreasingly fast as time goes by.
12 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
SVXY 4 hours ago
@SVXY Rule 66 of the highway code says you can ride two abreast but to also 'be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in groups.' It does not say you can ride three or four abreast which would not be considerate of the needs of other road users. As the highway code is used by prosecution lawyers as evidence to convict in Road Traffic Act offences cases you certainly could therefore be prosecuted and convicted for careless cycling if cycling three or four abreast
mdavidford 4 hours ago
@SVXY This is a curious tactic - rebutting your own argument with your very next sentence.
No Reply 5 hours ago
Affordable? Starting at £6K? You 'having a larf?
chrisonabike 5 hours ago
@SVXY Ah, so it *is* the "flood the zone with shit" argumentation technique then? Or perhaps ... you are genuinely unclear about the difference between the Highway code and the law (and perhaps the difference between cyclists, drivers and indeed horse riders? And rusty on safe practice? As mdavidford notes you appear to be confusing rule with Rule 66 (for cyclists, which doesn't say anything about not riding x abreast) with Rule 53 (for horse riders which gives guidance not to more than double up - I don't think this is a direct summary of any law since "should" not "must"). Charitably I'm going with "*i* know what it says!" which as I noted many of people feel they do. Anyway away with you, I feel you've had your fill of attention for today.
kingleo 6 hours ago
Road tax was abolished in 1937 by Winston Churchill because, as he said, "road tax makes motorists believe they are the moral owners of our roads." He got that right.
SVXY 6 hours ago
@SVXY None of the magistrates who sentenced him said the CPS should have charged him with dangerous driving. Why should they? He was not speeding, he was not on his phone and he was not drunk or under the influence of drugs either
Rendel Harris 7 hours ago
@SVXY The court does not decide on whether someone was driving carelessly or dangerously, they can only decide on the guilt or otherwise of the defendant on the charge the CPS decides to lay against them. The CPS is notorious for preferring to charge careless rather than dangerous because it's an easier win; this results in entirely unjust sentences such as this one.
SVXY 7 hours ago
@Rendel Harris Wearing sandals may be fine if cycling on tracks over fields or in a quiet residential street with a 20 or 30mph limit. It is not sensible cycling on a 60mph main road
belugabob 7 hours ago
@chrisonabike maybe, but things that used to be banter & jokes in the 1960s/1970s have (thankfully) become socially unacceptable , and this is mostly because enough people spoke up about it. We even managed to make drink-driving a lot less acceptable, by the same means.
SVXY 7 hours ago
@Rendel Harris Yes, he was driving at 55mph in a 60mph road. The court verdict was he was not driving dangerously but carelessly eg he should have had his visor down to keep out the sun so he could monitor the road ahead.
12 thoughts on “A lovely song about bikes. NSFW.”
A wasted opportunity. It
A wasted opportunity. It would be a much better song without the swearing. Shame. 🙁
Swearing is cool. And the
Swearing is cool. And the horn solo is genius.
Swearing is most effective
Swearing is most effective when not overdone – here, just a wee bitty too much
Very funny all the same – guess I’m a cross between the lycra racer & the angry commuter
Yeah, swearing once or twice
Yeah, swearing once or twice for effect would have been OK.
But in the words of John Lydon “Ooo – a rude word!!” it soon loses its shock value and becomes pathos.
Who gives a m*therf*ckin’
Who gives a m*therf*ckin’ sh!t?
It was all worth it just for 0:58
Funny as f*ck..
Funny as f*ck..
Well, it’s a rap, so
Well, it’s a rap, so profanity is what you would expect.
I particularly like the guy who “every day [does] the Tour de F*ck-you”
I love the guy who has a
I love the guy who has a cuppa on his bike.
Excellent! Reminds me of
Excellent! Reminds me of Performance by MC Spandex:
Total fried gold.
The only
Total fried gold.
The only character who’s missing is the hi-viz-black-leggings-rush-hour-road-warrior, but maybe he’s a UK creation?
I liked the fixie verse…
I liked the fixie verse… the rest was a bit clique :B
Excellent.
Excellent.