Trigger Happy’s Angry Cyclist is back: Local newspaper covers “fed-up” cyclist screaming “elephants” at pedestrians crossing a cycle lane… but it’s Dom Joly’s TikTok audio; Could TotalEnergies sponsor Ineos Grenadiers? + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Cyclists returning from French road trip fined £1,500 after migrant found inside bike rack on the back of their motorhome
TotalEnergies rumoured to co-sponsor Ineos Greadiers from 2026, throwing future of French ProTeam into doubt
The peloton could be looking to wave goodbye to French ProTeam TotalEnergies, as the oil company, currently their lead sponsor, could be ditching them to join WorldTour team Ineos Grenadiers as the second sponsor.
It was reported last month that Ineos, thought to be stuck in a transition period for the last few years, having lost many of its star riders, were looking for a co-sponsor, with the team CEO confirming that “Ineos don’t want to spend more money”.
According to Escape Collective, the French multinational oil and petroleum giant could come in and provide that additional bit of financial support to the struggling British outfit, which, in the past year, has come under scrutiny from fans and even its former riders, including Tom Pidcock.
Ineos has managed to turn its fortunes of late, securing three wins already this year, thanks to Michael Kwiatkowski, Josh Tarling, and yesterday’s time trial victory by Filippo Ganna. The Italian could’ve even made it four, if not for the Volta ao Algarve win that was written off…
Absolute cinema
I could see David Lynch helming this kind of a shot. Beauty in motion…
“It would also help if it were made mandatory for all cyclists to have a bell so they could at least warn pedestrians of their approach”
Chinese manufacturer Zhonglu buys 21% share in Factor Bikes
China’s Zhonglu Co, through one of its subsidiaries, has acquired a 21% share in Factor Bikes while a private equity firm that includes Factor CEO Rob Gitelis also has invested. Bicycle Retailer and Industry News reports that together, the two entities have acquired a majority share in Factor from exiting non-management shareholders.
The news has also been confirmed through filings made at the Shanghai Stock Exchange. Forever Bicycle, a brand owned by Zhonglu, also announced through its website: “We have joined hands with international top players to reshape the landscape of high-end road bikes in China!
“Important official announcement! Forever’s parent company Zhonglu jointly holds 52.87% of the shares of the world’s top bicycle brand Factor! This is a milestone strategic marriage in the Chinese bicycle industry, and it is also a strong layout for the future cycling ecology!”
“I hate him”: French rider calls David Gaudu “a horrible guy”, because he criticised him for his “lateness” and “passion for paddle”
In a sea of usually friendly and amiable behaviour in the peloton, far from the days of Armstrong and Contador, and in a world sanitised by media/PR training, it’s surprising to see a rider reserve such harsh words for another, especially your own countryman.
But according to a report in L’Équipe, TotalEnergies’ 26-year-old French rider Alexys Brunel has hit out at his former FDJ-Groupama teammate David Gaudu, accusing him of “spitting on him in his livestreams” by bashing Brunel for his “lateness” and “passion for paddle”.
Brunel spent two years at FDJ-Groupama after turning pro in 2020, making him a teammate of Gaudu as the Frenchman was enjoying success in the peloton, winning stages at the 2020 Vuelta and the young rider classification at the 2021 Critérium du Dauphiné, among other honours.
However, Brunel has stated that he doesn’t have any respect for him because of his criticisms on Twitch livestreams. “I hate him. He spat on me on his stupid livestreams. A horrible guy. He thinks he’s a champion, but he’s not,” he said.
He added: “He may have won races, but that doesn’t make him great. Nothing to do with Thibaut Pinot, an idol… When Thibaut was in my wheel, I gave 1,000%, I could have fallen to the ground.”
“This is just another area where he doesn’t know what he's talking about”: Reaction to MP Duncan Smith’s calls for mandatory bell law for cyclists
It had been quite some time since we had heard from Sir Iain Duncan Smith. The Conservative MP, previously in the news for his push for the ‘dangerous cycling’ bill, has returned, this time calling for a “mandatory bell law” for all cyclists, as well as renewing his campaign to turn the bill into law, and claiming that e-bikes are causing “major danger” (one from the BBC playbook, I see).
road.cc readers have reacted to his suggestion, and let’s just say, you lot haven’t been kind to the former party leader. Let’s have a roundup of all the replies and comments. First up, from the article:
Borisface: “More nonsense from IDS. Why do you need a bell? When I last checked most cyclists have a tongue in their heads. Nothing wrong with a friendly ‘coming through’.”
eburtthebike: “‘The main point I was making was we have had deaths on the street where cyclists cannot be prosecuted for having killed someone,’ the Chingford and Woodford Green MP said.
“Unlike drivers, who are always prosecuted for killing someone: no, wait a minute….. If the abhorrent IDS can’t see the forest because of the mote in his eye, then he just hates bikes.”
the little onion: “This has precisely 0 per cent chance of getting into legislation. It’s just unworkable. But that isn’t the point.”
“Instead, the purpose of this call for bells ends up being another salvo in a culture war.”
Meanwhile here’s what Real Gaz on a proper bike had to say on Bluesky…
The Tory mp desperately trying to gain publicity by calling for a mandatory bell law may want to not that it was his party that trashed that law in 2011. IDS is an out of touch idiot just trying to stir up a phoney culture war. road.cc/content/news…
— Real Gaz on a proper bike: gazza_d@toot.bike (@gazza-d.bsky.social) 11 March 2025 at 17:52
Some more replies from Facebook and Bluesky:
Ricky Hill: “So, we’re getting into the realms of mandatory hearing tests for pedestrians, a law banning the use of headphones etc, etc. Or you separate the lanes completely like they have in Europe decades ago.”
Bob Bending: “E-bikes are not dangerous. They become dangerous when ridden irresponsibly, just like bad drivers make vehicles a danger. A bell can be seen by many as aggressive – there’s no intonation there. On shared paths, I prefer to just slow down and say or shout ‘Hello’ or ‘Morning’ in a friendly tone. It’s less aggressive and usually works just fine. A lot of older people with hearing loss won’t hear a bell. People in conversation won’t hear a bell. People with headphones won’t hear a bell. As cyclists, we just need to be very careful and considerate on shared paths if there are pedestrians.”
Jamie Barber: “I regularly use my voice, for the simple reason a bell can be a bit blunt, sometimes people jump a mile or groups of people scatter. Whereas ‘please can I pass on your right’ is more polite, and helps them not to panic.”
Andy Kingdon: “Is there a more useless invention than the bicycle bell? No one hears them, so they exist only to highlight that the kind of people who demand their use are morons. Shouting ‘Excuse me’ and ‘thank you’ to pedestrians is more easily heard and polite so is more effective.”
Ian Myers: “You can compel a cyclist to have a bell, but you can’t enforce its use. On a shared use path, I find a cheery verbal ‘ding ding’ the most effective & less ‘surprising’ than a bell. Everyone on a shared-use path should be mindful of each other, so yes, pedestrians, please take those earphones out.”
Police sergeant tells cyclist he broke law by not riding in cycle lane after reporting close pass driver – but Irish government insists vast majority of bike paths are not compulsory
Visma-Lease a Bike dominate Paris-Nice team time trial, as Jayco-AlUla and Bora-Hansgrohe finish second and third respectively
With the team time trial making a comeback at the Tour de France next year, the third stage of Paris-Nice was a good demonstration of why fans are so excited for its return. Great tactics, top-notch excitement, and full gas bike riding — don’t tell me that’s not the perfect mix for some great viewing.
But at the same time, fears of a team time trial stage inadvertently favouring teams with big budgets and deep rosters came back to the fore, as Visma-Lease a Bike, with the help of their new signing Victor Campenaerts — and some brand new Vorteq TT skinsuits — came out on top.
Nothing to take away from Jayco-AlUla’s performance, however, with the Aussie duo of Michael Matthews and Ben O’Connor putting in a massive shift to grab third and fourth in the general classification, behind Visma-Lease a Bike’s Matteo Jorgensen and Jonas Vingegaard.
Jonathan Milan powers to bunch sprint victory in second stage of Tirreno-Adriatico
Thanks to an absolutely perfect leadout from Lidl-Trek, Jonathan Milan was placed perfectly for the bunch sprint finish at the second stage of Tirreno-Adriatico, beating out Maikel Zijlaard, Paul Penhoët and Olav Kooij.
The win meant we’ve had two Italians win the first two stages of the WorldTour race, with Filippo Ganna and Milan also sitting at the top of the general classification now.
RIP BikeRadar Forum: Cycling website announces closure of forum after 18 years citing “continually rising operational costs”
BikeRadar has announced that it will be shutting its forum on 17 March 2025, after over 18 years, due to “continually rising operational costs”.
“The BikeRadar forum was launched alongside the website in July 2007 and, in the nearly 18 years since, has helped hundreds of thousands of cyclists share their passion for the sport,” the team wrote in a post earlier today.
While users of the website will still be able to comment on articles and posts, all forum data — including posts, pictures, attachments and private messages — will be permanently deleted by 14 April 2025.
BikeRadar added: “The forum was launched when Facebook was in its infancy and Instagram didn’t exist. Online communities have evolved in ways none of us would have predicted nearly two decades ago.
“However, continually rising operational costs mean we are very sadly no longer able to support the BikeRadar forum.
“Over the years, the BikeRadar forum has been a valuable source of information for new cyclists. Upon the closure of the forum, we will also compile the most commonly asked questions from riders and ensure they are covered within content on BikeRadar.com.
road.cc founder Tony Farrelly, who was involved in the early days of the Cycling Plus forum as its editor, which eventually morphed into the BikeRadar forum, commented: “The BR forum going is the end of an era. It was formed from the Cycling Plus and MBUK forums which had been going since 2002, and were arguably the first really big UK-based cycling forums.”
In December, we reported that London Fixed Gear & Single Speed, another cult classic forum for cyclists, announced that it was shutting down on 16th March (just a day before BR) as a result of the introduction of the UK Online Safety Act.
Trigger Happy’s Angry Cyclist is back: Local newspaper mistakes Dom Joly’s TikTok audio for “fed-up” cyclist screaming “elephants” at pedestrians crossing cycle lane
Hey, remember the Angry Cyclist gag from Dom Joly’s Trigger Happy show?
By the look of things, EdinburghLive might not, because a TikTok video posted by an Edinburgh cyclist, passing through a cycle lane swarmed with pedestrians and overdubbed with a Dom Joly audio has been reported as… actually happening.
In the video, the cyclist appears to be shouting, “Cycle lane… it’s clearly a cycle lane!” at pedestrians, most probably exiting the Playhouse Theatre in Edinburgh and crossing over to the infamous Leith Walk cycle lane (road.cc Hall of Fame bike lane, surely?). The video ends with the cyclist randomly screaming, “Woah, elephants!”
@jacuss29 cycle lane Edinburgh Playhouse
But of course, it’s not the cyclist who’s saying or screaming anything. Nor would it make sense to hear motor-engine revving noises when he’s on a bike. Well, that’s because the audio used in the video comes from a TikTok ‘remix’. The original video, shared by comedian Dom Joly on the social media platform last year, actually has someone driving a motor scooter through a crowded street in Rishikesh, India, with Joly’s audio of screaming “cycle lane” added over it.
> Video: Trigger Happy’s angry cyclist appears on Comic Relief
The TikTok video itself is inspired from Joly’s divisive Trigger Happy episode from 2017, in which he plays the character of an ‘angry cyclist’ doing a cyclathon charity ride around the Britain for Sport Relief, with the main joke being Joly angrily insisting that wherever he happens to be riding is a cycle lane.
The ‘elephants’ bit? Well, the image below might explain it…
However, it seems that EdinburghLive, taking the video at its face value, has written a news report as if it was indeed the cyclist screaming all those things, titled: “Fed-up Edinburgh cyclist screams ‘elephants’ as he dodges pedestrians in cycle lane”
“A fed-up Edinburgh cyclist has shared the moment he was forced to swerve dozens of pedestrians taking up a popular cycle lane,” the article reads. “Posting on TikTok, he can be heard shouting ‘cycle lane’ and ‘it’s clearly a cycle lane’ as he battles the crowd.
“A swarm of people appear to be blocking his route as he progressively becomes more frustrated before branding the crowd as ‘elephants’.”
Alright, setting aside any cynical thoughts and concerns for news in a post-truth world, this does make for an extremely sardonic yet hilarious reading. Erm, maybe not as hilarious as the time when we mixed up our Stephen Roches…
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.
31 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
Really not. Sheesh, I am all for arguing about minutiae but really there are better hills to die on than this.
@mdavidford disc brakes and helmets too provocative, mayhaps.
(except we could only think of 8, so 3 of them are variations of 'different sized wheels'.)
I don’t think I’ll ever I understand dropper posts, even on the most brutal downhill you’re standing and the saddle is kind of useful for stability around knee height. My mate says it stops you getting whacked in the cobblers but I’ve never had that happen. I know people swear by them but I almost never use mine…
@Rendel Harris that's interesting because the article could simply say "from £45" to indicate that the shoe might not be available in your size or colour at that price. The review itself is very specific about the pricing, so it is not difficult to do.
@Freddy56 Yep, Or rather she was told she can step down and say what she likes (which was nonsense then and even more nonsense now) or she will be fired, which would be way more harmful to her career.
@Nigel Garage Oh yes, the defence of the country and adequate provision for the disabled are very much an either/or, we can't possibly have both. Hang on, what if we set about closing all the tax loopholes and avoidance schemes advised by greedy Essex accountants, then there might be enough to go round.
@Rendel Harris tut tut, you obviously haven't taken your DEI course yet. You can't say "the disabled" in this day and age because it objectifies them. You're turning an adjective into a noun, very poor form by someone who self-certifies as an expert in the English language. "Disabled people" is the non-discriminatory way to describe those with disabilities. Putting aside your ridiculous and cliched comparison of my vision of an equal society with National Socialism, the last thing I'm going to say on the topic is that society has infinite number of wants on a finite number of resources. Clearly you think doling out free cycling gear to people is more important than spending those same precious resources on treating people in the NHS, educating our children, or defending our country. Well, more power to you, but I'm certain the overwhelming majority of people think otherwise.
@chrisonabike Yes, of course in any march of 250,000 plus people you're going to get some nasty bits of work and idiots. The police have arrested some of these and from what I hear (friends have gone on the marches, I haven't) they are reasonably assiduous in doing so within the obvious limits of trying to identify and then isolate and arrest a person responsible for shouting stupid things in a massive crowd. However, and I'm happy to stand corrected if they should wish to make their position more clear, I assume from the tone of open_roads' remarks and his description of the marches as antisemitic that they regard any march protesting the behaviour of the Israeli government with regard to the slaughter in Gaza as being antisemitic. In any case, the point I was making still stands, as backed up by those arrest figures I quoted, which is that it is not accurate to say that the Met have a "not a priority" attitude to these marches, quite the opposite.
@Ramz Not in the slightest, because the supposed wrong price isn't part of the review, so no misleading or inaccuracy there, and the shoes are available, albeit only in one colour, for £45 as stated.
31 thoughts on “Trigger Happy’s Angry Cyclist is back: Local newspaper covers “fed-up” cyclist screaming “elephants” at pedestrians crossing a cycle lane… but it’s Dom Joly’s TikTok audio; Could TotalEnergies sponsor Ineos Grenadiers? + more on the live blog”
New Forest MP says cyclists
New Forest MP says cyclists should have ‘mandatory bell’
also in today’s Daily Echo:
Residents say speeding and anti-social cars top concern in police survey
Tom_77 wrote:
Presumably the striped robes and the obligation to shout “Unclean, unclean!” will come later…one suspects with this type of bell advocate, or “bellfriend” as we might call him, that if every cyclist had a bell and used it at every opportunity he would be protesting against the appalling nuisance, aggression and sound pollution of lycra-clad maniacs “demanding” people move aside.
Rendel Harris wrote:
“Bellfriend”, eh?
I see what you did there…
I think he’s perhaps unaware
I think he’s perhaps unaware how much many pedestrians hate it if you ring a bell (almost as much as if you don’t ring a bell).
And a bell is useless at warning a motorist.
brooksby wrote:
Bells also do nothing for the deaf / hard of hearing, those wearing earphones or deep in conversation, or if there’s lots of other ambient noise (maybe by a road) … in fact, if there were more than a few cyclists they’d be a nuisance more than a help as they’d just keep telling you what you already knew e.g. “cyclists about” and not much else.
I do sometimes wonder whether some of these folks have mental images of a 1930s ideal Britain in their heads? If in practice what they really want is to return to an imaginary golden age when things were more certain, and probably quieter (what could be causing all the noise in our environment, I wonder…)?
Tom_77 wrote:
From the article
“We are still using a piece of legislation from the mid-19th century, which was offensive and wild carriage driving, which is not acceptable, but it hardly ever commits anybody and convicts them either.”
I thought MPs weren’t allowed to lie to Parliament?
Steve K wrote:
I thought it was obligatory.
eburtthebike wrote:
Only of your name contains “de Pfeffel”
Tom_77 wrote:
This is the kind of thing a backbench MP proposes knowing it won’t change anything, but they can put about it on their ‘campaign’ on leaflets probably under the title of “working hard for you”.
It is a huge pity that Sir
It is a huge pity that Sir Julian missed the opportunity to remind pedestrians that, while cyclists are obliged to give priority to them on share paths, pedestrians still have a duty to be aware of their surroundings and have regard for other road users.
Axioms show that pedestrians who look around – including behind them – as they walk are more aware of other road users approaching from different directions. This effectively reduces the need for bells and other audible warnings to warn them of others’ presence.
Tom_77 wrote:
This is an idiotic point, badly made. Cyclists do not have any kind of immunity from prosecution; if there is a fatal collision and no prosecutions are brought, then that is presumably because it has been decided that no offences were committed.
Where offences have been committed, prosecutions can be, and are, brought. Charlie Alliston is a recent high profile example, and the link posted by brooksby elsewhere in today’s comments provides another example (also speaking to the right honourable gentleman’s point about “e-bikes” (aka illegal electric motorbikes)).
If there have been any cases where it is felt that a cyclist’s behaviour in a fatal incident really ought to have been considered criminal, but was not due to a deficit in current legislation, I am not aware of them. The only one I can think of that may come anywhere close is the recent Regent’s Park incident, but even then I’m not aware of any evidence to suggest the cyclist’s speed (despite being >20mph) or manner of cycling was particularly inappropriate for the conditions, such that it ought to have been considered criminal (as a minimum, the cyclist could have been prosecuted under current legislation for Careless Cycling if there had been any such evidence).
From the comments
From the comments
“Sums this MP up.
He regularly comes up with ideas like this as he needs to feel relevant
Try sending him an e mail, no chance as he’ll only accept hand written letters
The guys a dinosaur who needs to retire”
Deliveroo rider killed
Deliveroo rider killed cyclist in e-bike crash (BBC)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx20pv5d2zyo
Seems like the BBC have
Seems like the BBC have managed to get it wrong on two fronts there, firstly the bike was not an e-bike but an illegal electric moped, and secondly if the battery had run out so the motor wasn’t running at the time of the crash then it was effectively just an ordinary bicycle. Either way, not an e-bike on either count, unless you’re writing for an organisation that seems for some reason to have decided it’s going to blame e-bikes at every conceivable opportunity, whether it’s accurate or not.
There’s a lot going on in
There’s a lot going on in this report.
“He modified his e-bike so it was classed as a motorcycle” – good on them for getting the motorcycle bit for once (and the article does at least attempt to explain the legal EAPC rules, however cack-handedly). But was it really an ebike to start with? Or are they correct when they say, later on, that he “fitted a motor to his bicycle”.
He pleaded guilty to driving without a licence or insurance – so it was still seemingly treated an illegal motorbike notwithstanding that it wasn’t being ridden under power.
Both cyclists on the pavement.
[Snip]
[Snip]
secondly if the battery had run out so the motor wasn’t running at the time of the crash then it was effectively just an ordinary bicycle.
[Snip]
A moped that’s run out of petrol is still a moped.
It’s energy source – or lack of – doesn’t change its state.
brooksby wrote:
I’m unclear about how not wearing a helmet relates to measuring their speed?
What’s the legal status of
What’s the legal status of those weird “almost a zebra crossing” on cycle lanes? Are they legal – like ‘real’ zebra crossings – or are they advisory?
brooksby wrote:
My understanding is that a zebra crossing needs flashing beacons, so it’s not legal. But you shouldn’t be running people over if you can possibly avoid it.
The BlackBeltBarrister
The BlackBeltBarrister produced a video about Zebra crossings a few months ago. The legislation he showed on screen required “yellow globes” to mark either side of the crossing for it to be a legally considered a “Zebra crossing”.
Several times I have asked the question about the non-standard crossings (and roundabouts) that have been featured on road.cc, what is the legal position if you do not follow the full requirements usually required for proper Zebra crossings?
Tom_77 wrote:
Hadnt intended to, was just curious for the next time I get the stink eye from someone crossing one 😀
I’m pretty certain that there
I’m pretty certain that there are no circumstances where it is legal to deliberately run over a pedestrian regardless of the presence or absence of belisha beacons
The police and courts have
The police and courts have got news for you! It seems that there are quite a few people “innocently killing” pedestrians and cyclists. Presumably because both groups of vulnerable road users give them “no chance to avoid collision” by
throwing themselves in the roadappearing out of nowheresomehow ending up in collision and we will never know why as the driver can’t remember but it was a tragic accidentusing the infra in a sensible and normal manner as they are legally permitted to do (is this right?)Sorry, I failed to make it
Sorry, I failed to make it clear that it only applies while riding your bicycle.
Backladder wrote:
I agree.
However, (as a whatabout), I suspect there are a lot of motorists out there who think it’s OK for them to run people over under certain circumstances…
They are legal. Theres text
They are legal. Theres text buried in the TSRGD 2016 about it. Conventional zebra crossing may be applied to a cycle track. Used in this way, the zebra crossing does not require zig-zag markings and belisha beacons are optional. Might actually be in Traffic Signs Manual Chapter 6.
Moist von Lipwig wrote:
You’re correct:
16.2.12. Where a crossing is placed across a segregated cycle track the Regulations allow for the omission of the controlled area and the yellow globes (see Figure 15‑1). It may be necessary to reduce the dimensions of the black and white stripes to the minimum to retain proportionality. Give Way lines should always be provided, to enforce the requirement for cyclists to give way to pedestrians.
I suppose the next question is, is it still legal if there are no Give Way lines?
Why don’t people use the
Why don’t people use the cycle path that’s been installed at great expense?
Meh – can get round that easy
Meh – can get round that easy and safely enough. They need to take a lesson from Edinburgh drivers. For example – here’s a joint effort to block any forward progress on a cycle path.
You may think they’ve made a schoolboy error by leaving just enough space to squeeze between … but in fact that’s a higher-level strategy to lure cyclists out into the path of motor traffic where neither has a clear view of the other! (And don’t tell me you’re thinking “but the 20mph zone and adjacent junction means that drivers will be going slowly and keeping an eye out”!)
For the first time, the
For the first time, the Norwegian government has calculated the value to society of the health benefits of increased walking and cycling.
🚲 ~€2.8 for each additional km of cycling
🚶♀️ ~€4.2 for each additional km of walking
https://www.helsedirektoratet.no/rapporter/dokumentasjonsrapport-helseeffekter-av-fysisk-aktivitet-per-km-gange-og-sykling
And other counties also have
And other counties also have done this IIRC with total cost/ benefit – including contribution to businesses and shopping – with similar results. (I have seen at least one study that showed private motoring is a net cost also).
… and it makes no difference in most places because driving is so ingrained (and the motor lobby hasn’t gone away or gone broke either).
What’s annoying is not that we all pay for driving – there are plenty of questionable things we all foot the bill for, or that overall it’s worth paying for. It’s the constant “driving powers the economy and makes us richer” from politicians – who should know better.
Well, they’re politicians, not researchers I guess…