“Dysfunctional clown show”: Cycling fans react to Tom Pidcock’s departure and accuse Ineos Grenadiers of “complete lack of ambition” and “monumental” decline; How to cross a bridge like Danny MacAskill + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Campag's back in the WorldTour... but how will that rear mech fare in a bunch sprint?
It’s good to see Campagnolo back in the WorldTour, isn’t it?
Anyway, here was 100 Climbs author Simon Warren’s first thought…
Yep, it’s time for some gentle social media ribbing…
“What else does it do? Surely it must do something else… Maybe a fax machine or something?”
“Built-in coffee machine perhaps?”
“Does the rider have to carry some ballast on their left hand side to keep it in a straight line?”
“I thought they’d snagged a bin bag”
“It’s a good thing Guillame Martin left when he did, he’d barely be able to move with that thing attached.”
“Can we rewind to 2012 and choose a different time path for, like, everything?”
Cyclist denied car insurance claim for fitting bike carrier with removable towbar
> Cyclist denied car insurance claim for fitting bike carrier with removable towbar
Paddy McGuinness calls in David Beckham's tattoo artist after raising £10m for Children in Need with 300-mile Chopper ride
He’s sticking to his word…
Paddy McGuinness pledged he’d get a tattoo of the Raleigh Chopper he completed his epic 300-mile charity ride on, if he raised more than £10 million for Children in Need. With the total now at £10.5 million, he has called in David Beckham’s tattoo artist Louis Molloy to get it done.
“He did, if you remember back in the day, he did the big David Beckham one on his back, the big angel,” McGuinness told BBC Radio 2. “He’s been in touch and he’s sent me a few images… I don’t want to put them on my Instagram yet because I want to get it done.
“I promise you, I’ll get it done before Christmas and I’ll show it to you.”
In a bizarre post-challenge update, last month it was revealed that McGuinness has sued the gossip site Popbitch over an “utterly false” claim the 51-year-old stopped during his 300-mile charity cycle to indulge in a Michelin-starred meal.
The weekly newsletter accused McGuinness of taking a helicopter to visit the Cumbrian village of Cartmel, where he allegedly enjoyed a 15-course fine-dining experience at three Michelin-starred restaurant L’Enclume, before staying there overnight.
However, Paddy’s team have denied the claims made by the site – which specialises, it says, in ‘Scurrilous gossip. Scandalous Stories’ – and have prepared a legal letter against Popbitch.
“The story is completely and utterly false, at no point did Paddy leave the challenge or the team,” a source said. “They were together every second. Paddy most nights was getting physio to prep him for the next day, followed by an early night due to the 6am wake-up.”
"I live the reality of the danger of cycling in traffic almost every day": Tadej Pogačar joins international road safety campaign urging drivers to respect cyclists by not texting or drinking – while calling for cyclists to wear helmets
You will soon be able to take bikes on Manchester's Metrolink trams, as 32-year ban overturned (but only at off-peak times and by using one of two spaces provided)
Bikes will soon be allowed on Greater Manchester’s Metrolink tram network as a 32-year ban is to be overturned. The news was first reported by the Manchester Evening News, the carrying of bikes on the Metrolink system having not been permitted at any point since the service launched in 1992.
Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) undertook a trial this year and has decided that two bicycle spaces will be installed on each of the system’s 147 vehicles. The transport provider did add that the process of seat layouts being changed means the allowing of bicycles on services will not come into effect for at least a year, and will only apply at off-peak times.
“Allowing bikes on Metrolink would align with our transport strategy which aims to build a world-class walking, wheeling and cycling network,” TfGM commented. “The Metrolink network is designed to be as accessible as possible, with level boarding and step-free access at all stops, with some requiring lifts for this purpose.
“The trams are designed with two wheelchair spaces, which can also be used for pushchairs, prams and certain types of mobility scooters. By allowing the carriage of bikes during off-peak times the catchment area of Metrolink could be widened as people may choose to cycle a little further than they are prepared to walk to get to a tram stop.
“This could boost patronage by tapping a new market during off-peak times when the services have capacity.
“The feedback from the pilot and discussions with disability groups revealed that the main concern was that the accessible spaces on the tram should be retained for use by disabled people, therefore, it is recommended that two separate spaces are provided on each vehicle for bikes. This means that the tram interiors and seating would need to be reconfigured to allow the safe carriage of bikes.”
"When one door closes another opens…": Tom Pidcock thanks Ineos Grenadiers for "so many amazing memories that will stick with me for a lifetime"
Domenico Pozzovivo stopped and fined by Italian police for riding two abreast, as retired pro cyclist says "I'd rather pay the fine than risk ending up under another car"
Hmmmm, not sure he's going to win too many F1 races if that's the speed he drives at
"Dysfunctional clown show": Cycling fans react to Tom Pidcock's departure and accuse Ineos Grenadiers of "complete lack of ambition" and "monumental" decline
The most protracted transfer saga of the off-season took a huge step forwards yesterday, Ineos Grenadiers and Tom Pidcock confirming they would be parting ways at the end of the year. Few will be too surprised given the cracks, rumours and gossip since Pidcock was dropped from the team’s Lombardia line-up on the eve of the race.
Well, on the team’s Facebook page, the reaction to the departure of one of British cycling’s biggest stars was fairly punchy, fans accusing the team of having shown a “complete lack of ambition” and overseeing a “monumental decline” in recent times.
One fan congratulated Pidcock and said: “Even you couldn’t prevent this ship from sinking. We’re behind you all the way.”
Another added: “Thank god he can get away from this dysfunctional clown show of a team that needs to overhaul its senior management.”
“Sad day for Ineos fans,” a third wrote. “I hope he finds a team that enables him to reach his goals. It is mad that people consider that a double Olympic champion had a sub-par year. We set incredibly high expectations. All the best Tom.”
As with some of the stories and gossip that has emerged over the past few months, the discussion wasn’t completely one-sided, some suggesting Pidcock had a “toxic element” and “caused a lot of his own problems”.
One comment said Pidcock “needs to decide where his heart lies”, another adding that while “a brilliant solo rider, a team player he disappointingly hasn’t been”.
“I think the best way to define this story is that it’s probably best for both parties, whatever the rights and wrongs. And there will be an element of each on either side,” one very measured commenter wrote… that’s far to mature for social media comments sections, I’m afraid.
Cycling Podcast host Daniel Friebe echoed that sentiment on Twitter/X and said “everything points to” a transfer to Q36.5… “Understand Pidcock ‘divorce’ was relatively amicable in the end, despite very onerous financial considerations. ‘Like a married couple who know they want different things,’ I was told by a source today.”
So, how did we get here? Reports of tensions with the Ineos Grenadiers hierarchy came to a dramatic crescendo at the final Monument of the season Il Lombardia. On the eve of the race Pidcock was deselected by his team despite being “in great shape”, cue weeks of speculation about whether he’d be leaving the team this winter.
Geraint Thomas weighed in on the situation, questioning the “people who are around Tom”.
“I don’t actually know what has gone on, but all I know is, when you’re the highest-paid rider in your team, and it’s obviously a really c**p situation,” he said. “He’s not happy, the team’s not happy. How has it got to this point? I don’t know.
“People who are around Tom, I don’t think help. I don’t know how… The fact is that he had a great chance of performing today [at Il Lombardia]. I saw that Zak had said it’s a management call, it’s not a performance call. I certainly don’t know anything about that. We’re just riders, eh? What do we know about management?
“It’s just not good, is it? All the bull**** aside, he’s a great talent. He’s a good guy, when I’m around him we have a nice time, so it’s not good to see that situation. We’ll see what happens.”
Not long after, an anonymous pro cyclist writing in the Belgian press claimed Tom Pidcock is “a bit of a loner” at Ineos Grenadiers and caused friction. The saga rolled into November, two-time British national champion Brian Smith dubbing Ineos “Team Circus” and sticking up for Steve Cummings (a rider he managed at MTN-Qhubeka back in the mid-2010s) who has left his DS role at Ineos.
“No real surprise to see Steve Cummings leave Team Ineos,” Smith wrote. “Must be hard to do your job when gagged for most of the year.
Turning to the Pidcock saga, Smith addressed the rumours linking the rider to the Q36.5 team: “Team Circus continues, after allowing your marquee rider to leave the team while willing to pay 20 per cent of his salary then doing a U-turn to keep him. Not sure this is over. Ivan Glasenberg has invested in Q36.5 and owns Pinarello. A match for Pidcock who was keen on the move.
“These decisions were helped by Team Circus pulling Pidcock from Lombardia. Why you may ask? Had the form, thought he could win but did not want to risk paying the high bonus.”
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.
34 Comments
Read more...
-1024x680.jpg "“Clear anti-cyclist bias”: Lawsuit filed against Toronto police after cop doored cyclist… before ticketing rider over incident")
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
If you could show me a cycling helmet that's designed to protect me when I'm hit by a motor vehicle that would be really helpful. All the ones I've seen so far are only intended to protect me if I fall off a bike.
I do not achieve the speeds of pro-cyclists (45mph+) when I cycle to work or the shops, just as I do not achieve 200mph+ when I drive to the shops.
LLMs are indeed an enormous bag of words, but they are also a clever bag of words as when they pick the next most probable word, they are using a multi-dimensional mappings or relations between words and so they appear to communicate like a human, but they are only simulacrums and have no understanding or intelligence.
The article does say that the parrot lived in Scarponi's son's warehouse. It is sad that Franky reportedly died in the factory fire, but apparrotly he had been warned several times about smoking near to packaging materials. Although the parrot (a blue and yellow macaw) is native to Central and South America, it could probably survive in the wild in Europe, as long as winters weren't too harsh. But this article proves beyond all doubt that parrots are polycyclic.
Clever is not a synonym for enormous ;-)
Try Specsavers
Personally, I think the belkin one was a vast improvement over pretty much all the rabobank offerings - blue and orange - bleuch! Although the blanco kit was much better than either of them (or the subsequent visma ones).
Why do these medical professionals never mention shit driving or infrastructure? And why do they never say anything about all the other activities that helmets might also help with e.g. Driving or being a pedestrian.
I have the current generation of 4iiii heart-rate monitor. It's very good . Will I , when the current one eventually fails , buy this new 4iiii , no. Why you may ask . Well it looks like a proprietary fastener . We all know about proprietary standards and the absolute hassle of sourcing replacements and the associated costs.
I like castorama and Astana kits pictured here.
34 thoughts on ““Dysfunctional clown show”: Cycling fans react to Tom Pidcock’s departure and accuse Ineos Grenadiers of “complete lack of ambition” and “monumental” decline; How to cross a bridge like Danny MacAskill + more on the live blog”
From what I recall about TP,
From what I recall about TP, it was Brailsford who signed him ? he’s not at Ineos but at Man.U, Ineos are just like a BIG companies team, 2012 is waaay in the distance when they where good, now it’s just an expensive group of youngsters advertising Ineos and that’s really not interesting
Define interesting? You can
Define interesting? You can say a lot about Tom and INEOS but you can’t deny that he as a rider isn’t interesting and the ongoing car crash at INEOS isn’t entertaining, if not for the cycling.
Whats been interesting looking at the more Tom-critical SM accounts is how much they get on their high horse for him not being a pure roadie. Like it offends their elitism or something. When not being a pure road rider is exactly why INEOS signed him for so much cash.
A large chunk of people seem in denial about what road riding is – an opportunity for big brands – and some fairly toxic ones at that – to brand-wash by getting their logos on podiums and TV. By that standard Toms done a decent job.
I dont know if they are blinkered about the Sky days but they tend to forget that Pro’s are mobile advertising hoardings – or at least selectively forget that applies to most of the other riders – be it Pog greenwashing a Petro-state or Vingegaard reputation washing a Granny farmer and Car Importer. ( The list could go on…)
Yeah, the SM and forum pure
Yeah, the SM and forum pure roadies stick out like a sore thumb – and show just how ignorant most of them are towards any off-road disciplines. I don’t think it helps that there is still a stigma from journalists who don’t think anything non road, is proper cycling. I mean it’s only nearly 2025……..
Ineos signed him as a multi discipline rider, and that is what they got; and he’s won in three different disciplines. Job done.
Pro cycling isn’t just about watts, FTP, W/kg – there is a skill element as well, something they all too often overlook as unimportant.
exactly. TP has in fact hit
exactly. TP has in fact hit every target that Ineos set him. This is largely a case of failure to honour the contractual agreement between team and rider, aka serious mismanagement .
Secret_squirrel wrote:
“Oh god, oh god, we’re all gonna die”
Sorry 😉
brooksby wrote:
Like everything from the “inevitable betrayal” to [I]that[/I] log, your comment touched my heart.
“dysfunctional clown show” a
“dysfunctional clown show” a very apt description of Pidders of St Cock.
Care to actually substantiate
Care to actually substantiate that? Your biases are showing.
I dont see him as any better or worse than any of the current crop of biking superstars and considerably better behaved than say someone like Sagan or even Cav. If he is – how exactly?
dubwise wrote:
Junior world champion in cyclocross, mountain bike and road time trial, double mountain bike Olympic champion, cyclocross world champion, mountain bike world champion, one day classics winner, winner on Alpe d’Huez in the Tour…perhaps British cycling needs more dysfunctional clowns…
I just want to see him
I just want to see him descend more.
ktache wrote:
Luckily a few weeks back a different (but still utterly terrifying) camera view of him descending Tuna Canyon was released, so you can!
My humblest to apologies to
My humblest to apologies to all those affected by my comment. I sincerely did not know that St Pidders was above criticism.
Well, you didn’t so much
Well, you didn’t so much criticise him as throw him an infantile insult. Which is pretty childish really.
And maybe consider the success TP has had, whilst operating under the terms of his contract, before being critical. Not many British riders have achieved as much by the time of turning 25 y.o.
Your comment wasn’t criticism
Your comment wasn’t criticism, it was name-calling. There’s a difference.
Oh my, not allowed to slag
Oh my, not allowed to slag english cyclists then?
Yesterday, there were “childish” insults thrown by road.cc at an ex-pro. But that was fine because he wasn’t english.
‘critisism’.
‘critisism’.
It’s pretty clear the only clown here is you.
No one here said you can not critisize Pidcock. We asked you to substantiate your infantile name calling.
Isn’t allowing bikes on the
Isn’t allowing bikes on the trams an admission the cycling infra isn’t good enough ?
Because the trams are slow, anyone who has a bike is easily going to beat them on a journey.
True in one sense. OTOH
True in one sense. OTOH having a bit of “multi-modal” via tram is an excellent way to improve the utility of said tram.
Set against that there is a general question of “if the whole point of the tram is capacity e.g. fast and frequent loading/boarding won’t having bikes on there work against that?”
Of course Edinburgh Tram tried to shoot down one style of “expanding cachement areas for tram stops” – e.g. cycle to the tram, lock bike, board tram – by installing uniquely hapless insecure cycle stands. (Ignoring the council’s own pretty good standards).
But then – the once or twice I was on the Edinburgh tram with bike I can’t say there were enough people for us to be in the way…
Doesn’t bother me in Edinburgh because we only have one tram (line) and it’s quicker to cycle to almost any point on it than cycle to it AND then take it to the destination.
stonojnr wrote:
That would be a problem if anyone in a position of authority really cared enough about whether it was good enough or thought that a majority of their electorate did.
“Cyclist registration will
“Cyclist/cycle registration will enable offenders to be caught”
As that always happens with drivers…
“Scammer helped speeding drivers dodge prosecution”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cre7jl1v535o
If the criminal hadn’t been caught for it’s gun crimes, how much longer would this have continued…?
It is so easy to obtain false
It is so easy to obtain false number plates for vehicles and that companies selling such number plates are so easily able to use myriad excuses get around the law that the number plate system is no longer fit for purpose, coupled with a lack of enforcement means that it is a free-for-all for drivers…but cyclists!
This is similar to the EAPC vs electric motorbikes debacle. The laws are weak, and enforcement is non-existent, coupled with the general level of ignorance amongst the police about what is legal and what isn’t. It is so easy though. If the rider doesn’t seem to have to pedal and there is no number plate it is illegal…but cyclists!
We have the dumb situation in the UK where the slowest vehicles are speed restricted yet that fastest vehicles are unrestricted. It is amazing that at the age of 17 you can buy a car that is legal to drive on the roads that can exceed the motorway speed limits by 200% yet EAPCs are restricted to 15.5mph.
Isn’t this justification to have mandatory dashcams and compulsory intelligent adaptive speed control for drivers so that it is impossible to exceed speed limits?…but cyclists!
The police’s motto is now presumably “Yeah it’s such a problem isn’t it but there’s nothing we can really do about it”. This is what a police officer said to me when as a pedestrian I pointed out an illegal electric motorbike being used by a local chap who I’ve seen repeatedly who was around 50m from the officer in question. My response was “You can confiscate it” to which the police replied “OK then I’ll go have a look” after which they did nothing.
I saw an article on BBC1 London news where the fire brigade was telling people that they appreciate how “great” e-scooters are for getting around London but to only buy their e-scooters from reputable shops to avoid house fires! Reputable shops don’t sell e-scooters because they are not allowed on the roads. Any shop that is selling them is by definition not reputable. I see that a high street retailer of cycles is selling them.
I’m looking forward to ordering my false plates for when I have to register all my bikes individually for use on the roads, and pay the CVLA or whatever the dumb quango will be called that forces me to do it.
Pub bike wrote:
I don’t agree with you on that – private e-scooters are 100% legal to use on private land and 100% legal to buy and sell. Yes, using them on public roads/pavements is illegal, but that’s an enforcement issue and the police don’t see it as a priority.
It’s true that by the rules
It’s true that by the rules it’s just “illegal behaviour” rather than illegal things. And in fact because of legal complexities in general it is quite hard to tell from a distance (although usually “I know it when I see it” – if someone’s going fast uphill without pedalling and is not wearing a motorbike helmet and doesn’t have a licence plate e.g. haven’t registered this per “speed pedelec” then that’s one).
HOWEVER the legislators and retailers * appear 100% not to give a stuff about the legality, or the consequences of suddenly introducing all kinds of powered vehicles on to the streets. (Indeed, it seems like all of us they’re wowed by “shiny new” tech). And the police are pretty much the same.
Currently they’re sort of at “minor nuisance” levels. And clearly the “apocalypse” some people have been foretelling for years hasn’t occurred. However I don’t think having large numbers of these is a good idea at all if we want to have more active travel. Or feel that cycling and walking are a solution to lots of our current issues of “motornormativity”.
It’s kind of like an extension of the “cars 2.0 – now they’re electric” harm minimization idea (allows us to keep selling tech stuff!). So now the vehicles are just much smaller, lighter and a bit slower. Hoorah! Car problems fixed!
But again it’s still stuff foisted on the public by vastly rich businesses (the point there being that the lawmakers will be bought and the rules ignored and then rewritten). AFAIK nobody’s done much “safety” or “side effects” assesment of these. They could be “taking over spaces” (I wouldn’t feel really comfortable walking through fleets of these). They still require power, and limited resources to build, and they’re even less recyleable…
I’m almost certainly farting against the whirlwind of human nature there though!
* Even “in respectable high-street shops” – depending on how you view Currys/PC world that is! – as they sell e-scooters.
chrisonabike wrote:
I think that on balance, e-scooters are a benefit to society in terms of harm reduction. They solve a couple of transport/commuting issues and are cheap, efficient and not particularly polluting (their batteries are probably the biggest problem). Various places have been trialling the legal e-scooter hire schemes and it seems bizarre that a private company can provide legal road-going e-scooters and yet a private individual cannot, even though they are likely to take better care of their own scooter than a hired one and private scooters don’t cause an issue with blocking pavements.
hawkinspeter wrote:
I’m mixed on these. At least currently, in the UK, I just see them either in the “toys” class or competing with walking for modal share. Possibly with buses. But certainly not competing with cars. (Exception – I have come across a couple of people who used them in addition to public transport to replace driving – when they were banned! Of course cycling could also do that – if people felt it was safe and were used to cycling – but they don’t and aren’t.)
I’m not sure I see that changing, without these becoming much more like mini-motorbikes. Or improving the “active travel infra” and surely we hope the point of doing that is more to encourage active travel?
I can certainly see use cases e.g. tiny storage footprint, which gets around “where do you store a bike (securely)”, and also facilitates last-mile multi-modal travel.
Also “mass selling more things with batteries” because these can probably be made way more affordable than cars or even e-bikes?
They could be a helpful piece to slot in to the UK’s current broken transport jigsaw-puzzle, to try to get away from driving. I just think their potential is limited without doing all the things we would need anyway to fix our systems to reduce driving. Which are in fact all those for increasing active travel.
If we already have lots of these things plus those facilities I could imagine we might skip the “active” bit of active travel completely as the cycle path becomes a scooterpath. Or “scooter and speed-pedelec” path, which may eventually lead to “scooting on the ‘footway’, 30mph+ electric motorbikes on the ‘cycle path’ “. With people still mostly driving because “carrying stuff / other people” / “weather” etc.
Again that might be pessimisticly dystopian. Or it might be simply “yeah most people use motor vehicles to get around for anything more that a few hundred metres now in the UK and they’re just not going to go back to walking and (unpowered / low powered) cycling, ever”.
chrisonabike wrote:
I think they’re really useful for shortish journeys – maybe up to 5 miles? They appeal to people as they’re seen as “casual” – just hire one, hop on it and zoom off to where you want to go. No need for fancy clothing etc.
They probably do compete a bit with walking, but most people will only walk a very short journey of maybe up to half a mile, so there’s quite a big range of journeys where someone will opt for an e-scooter rather than getting someone to drive them there.
Ideally, we’ll fix all of our various transport issues, but in the meantime, I think e-scooters are here to stay so let’s accept them and try to minimise their issues.
Up to five miles? Dress for
Up to five miles? Dress for the destination not the journey? Where have I heard that before…? Could there be some other mode of transport – perhaps one with lots of additional benefits (albeit lacking the extremely small storage footprint of a scooter) which covers that use case? Perhaps even one which lots of people even currently own (but just don’t use)?
I want to keep an open mind but the scooters seem to be kicking around between “a distraction” and “just something new people want to sell which is at best of ‘neutral’ benefit if not a problem in some ways”.
There clearly are *some* people who will replace some driven journeys but:
a) longer distances tend to be on the “more illegal” more powerful scooters
b) … because until we have the infra, to get these distances quickly and conveniently you’ll be doing this on the roads (little cycle infra, footways you’ll have conflict with pedestrians)
c) … which are unfriendly (because cars)
Then there is the “if I’m going longer distances, I’ll probably get a car anyway” and “once I have a car, I’ll tend to use it over other modes”. The same difficulty applies to cycling now of course…
chrisonabike wrote:
Whilst cycling is obviously the best mode of transport and exercise and generally making people awesome, there’s quite a few people that like the idea of just standing on a scooter and having an electric motor whizz them along. The only time I’ve tried an e-scooter was in Copenhagen and they are fun to ride, but not particularly economical for longer journeys.
The thing is that most people are lazy and even e-bikes aren’t convenient enough for them unless they mod them to go without being e-assist. Also, e-bikes are a lot more than e-scooters.
Well, I was speculating on
Well, I was speculating on that. There’s human nature (go for easy), there’s having “shiny new things” (display of prestige / fashion / wealth), there’s curiosity, there’s plenty of market forces, there’s “we’ve just taken agin bikes and cycling, and/or see them as part of the past”…
… *mutters* and yet it moves (in large part on cycles – still mostly with no electric assist)! 2018, 2024…
I agree it is 100% legal to
I agree it is 100% legal to buy and sell them but it can only be a very small percentage of those bought in London that are for use on private land, because most people don’t have access to such land.
It is difficult to know what the police see as a priority.
It is difficult to know what
It is difficult to know what the police see as a priority
It’s everything that sounds convincing, caring and sharing, but excluding the offences which the person in front of you is complaining about
Pub bike wrote:
Yes, people are obviously buying them to ride illegally – I don’t dispute that. However, who benefits by having e-scooters being illegal to use on a public road?
As far as police setting priorities, I daresay that they prioritise protecting rich people and their revenue streams.
What percentage are on public
What percentage are on public roads, and what percentage on public footways?
Outside of “may hit others; if sufficiently popular may act to suppress both demand for walking and the feeling of safety when walking” … another concern is the safety for the users. Small wheels, short wheelbase plus upright position – that would seem to be already concerning. Add in the fact these are used on and off pavements (kerbs) and – if they are used on streets / roads – the certainty of grates, edges of access covers and just general holes in road.
Having said that I’ve talked to a few people who’ve ridden these for a bit and they were still alive. Though I did come across one crashed in the road one night, but the chap blamed his phone for distracting him – so no more danger there than in a car!
chrisonabike wrote:
Decent separated infrastructure would entice riders away from the footways and allow them to feel safe using the road. Ideally, the infrastructure shouldn’t have slippery ironworks, potholes and other hazards, but I think we can rely on people’s self-preservation instincts to reduce the incidents. Unfortunately, there’s going to be fatalaties on e-scooters, but then we also get them with pedestrians, cyclists and drivers so it’s a question of reducing them as much as possible.
One interesting safety issue with e-scooters is the question of helmets. I think they’re likely to be of benefit to riders due to the increased chances of single vehicle collisions (small wheels etc), but hire services make the use of helmets trickier as most riders won’t want to be carrying a helmet around. However, by allowing private e-scooter usage, there’s more chance that the owner will be putting their e-scooter somewhere safe which lends itself well to keeping a helmet with it too.