“This genuinely could kill somebody”: Viral video of overenthusiastic Tour de France fan being pushed off mountain for running next to cyclists sparks debate online; Would you pay £1,000 for a pair of aero socks?; Election reaction + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Would you pay £1,000 for a pair of aero socks? Mark Cavendish's 'Project 35' Nopinz socks available online
It’s been the Tour of expensive aero tech. Dylan Groenewegen got his nose in front to take yesterday’s sprint wearing his ‘aero beak’, an attachment that Scicon has now made available online, priced at £300 for UK buyers. Don’t all rush at once…
Well, once you’ve got that you can head over to aero clothing specialists Nopinz who are selling the socks Mark Cavendish has been seen in during this Tour de France. That’s if you’ve got a spare £999.99 down the back of the sofa.
Named P35, a reference to Project 35 and Cavendish’s hunt for the outright Tour stage wins record, they are, Nopinz says: “Designed by champions for champions. These exceptional socks are crafted for a groundbreaking project, offering unparalleled performance and comfort. Elevate your ride with the perfect blend of innovation and excellence.”
Unfortunately for the brand, Cav’s history-making win on Wednesday was achieved in a pair of the team’s standard-issue socks, the Manx Missile changing back having been spotted rocking the extra aero ones earlier in the week.
If you sign up to Nopinz’s mailing list you’ll get five per cent your order and can very truthfully tell that significant other you got £50 off. Or just buy an entire bike, or a set of wheels, or a top of the range turbo trainer, or a different cycling outfit for every day of the week, or a holiday, or you know, anything you want that costs almost £1,000.
On your bike! Numerous Conservative politicians who have made questionable cycling claims lose their seats
.jpg)
Let’s face it, despite relentless culture war noise around cycling in recent times, cycling and active travel were never prominent during the election campaign. With that said, it would be remiss of this live blogger to miss the opportunity to dig deep into the road.cc archives and pick out some of the politicians we’ve reported on during the last four-and-a-half years and see how they got on.
It’s our (at times tenuous) cycling election round-up. We’ll start with the most recent Transport Secretary.
Mark Harper (Conservative) LOST
The final Tory Transport Secretary lost his Forest of Dean seat to Labour (you’ll be hearing more of that) in one of the tightest results of the night. Harper’s majority from 2019 had been more than 15,000, but in a disastrous night for the former minister for transport, a huge swing to Labour, plus Reform taking 17 per cent of the vote, saw him lose his seat in Parliament by just 278 votes.
In more recent times, as one of his last acts in the role, Harper agreed to a proposal to introduce tougher laws for “dangerous cyclists” who kill or injure, as he said “it’s only right tiny minority who recklessly disregard others face full weight of the law”. That legislation was not passed in time, due to Rishi Sunak calling the election, although during the campaign Labour pledged to introduce it in the next Parliament.
Grant Shapps (Conservative) LOST
Where do you start with Grant Shapps? Another former Transport Secretary, Shapps’ time was, from the viewpoint of a cycling website’s interests, defined by that mad week in August 2022 when he proposed number plates, insurance and speed limits for cyclists… before making a rather quick U-turn. Shapps lost his Hertfordshire constituency of Welwyn Hatfield to Labour after his share of the vote plummeted 19 per cent.
Jacob Rees-Mogg (Conservative) LOST
North East Somerset and Hanham also went to Labour, Jacob Rees-Mogg presumably already banging on the GB News studio doors shouting to be let in. We’ve had less involvement with Rees-Mogg than others, although his opposition to a bike lane in Keynsham and use of an “extremely offensive racist term” while talking about “lunatic” cycle lane plans earned him some road.cc time.
Iain Duncan Smith (Conservative) WON
The former Conservative leader spearheaded the campaign to introduce the aforementioned new ‘dangerous cycling’ laws. Iain Duncan Smith kept his Chingford and Woodford Green seat, in part due to the opposition vote being split between the former Labour candidate Faiza Shaheen (who was replaced and subsequently ran as an independent) and the then-instated Labour candidate Shama Tatler.
Philip Davies (Conservative) LOST
During the campaign we heard from a reader who accused Davies of “massive prejudice against cyclists” after “angry email rant” to constituent who questioned his “contradictory” road safety views and number plates for cyclists stance. That was the least of Davies’ problems when it transpired he was one of those who’d been down the bookies to bet £8,000 on the election date. It’s always the ones you least expect. Anyway, Davies will presumably be joining Rees-Mogg down the GB News job centre having also lost his seat last night.
Nick Fletcher (Conservative) LOST
The Conservative former MP who was criticised for touting a known 15-minute city conspiracy in Parliament, and who later claimed cycling routes have turned his city into a “ghost town”, lost his Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme seat to Labour last night.
Thérèse Coffey (Conservative) LOST
Thérèse Coffey, the Conservative politician who for a brief period during the autumn of 2022 served as health secretary during Liz Truss’ stint as prime minister, lashed out at an active travel project in her Suffolk constituency, claiming that it is “anti-driver”. Last night, Coffey lost her Suffolk Coastal seat to Labour, her share of the vote down a third on 2019.
Nigel Farage (Reform) WON
During his years of opportunistically jumping from issue to issue, Farage has unsurprisingly had a pop at cycling a couple of times, perhaps most famously in 2021 during a rant about “insane” cycle lanes. And no, you probably don’t need me to tell you in this case “insane” isn’t a positive adjective…
> Nigel Farage forges new career as anti-cycling bingo caller
Louise Haigh (Labour) WON
The shadow transport secretary easily kept her seat in Sheffield, so we’re assuming Louise Haigh will be the next head of transport now her party is in government. In November, concerns were expressed after Haigh began to outline her stance on active travel policies, 20mph speed limits and low-traffic neighbourhoods.
However, she later insisted that active travel is “essential for economic growth” and “every pound invested delivers a huge return in benefits”. She also said comments about Sheffield being too hilly to cycle in were a “light-hearted joke”.
And finally, anyone know how this guy got on last night? At least he’ll have a driver taking him everywhere from now on…
> Sir Keir Starmer was ‘making U-turn’ when he hit cyclist, says witness
Do you have these cycling essentials? 10 things we think every budding cyclist needs
I know what you’re all itching to know: ‘Does the aero beak make the cut???’
> Do you have these cycling essentials? 10 things we think every budding cyclist needs
"I'm glad Mathieu eats a greasy hamburger every now and then": Adrie van der Poel concerned by "really not healthy" dieting in pro cycling
Mathieu van der Poel’s father Adrie has spoken out about “really not healthy” dieting in pro cycling and admitted he is “glad Mathieu eats a greasy hamburger every now and then”.
Speaking to Wieler Revue, he said: “In the past, almost all female cyclists had anorexia and when I look at today’s cyclists, I almost get scared when I see them walking. They are already so thin and all the food has to be weighed. I am glad that Mathieu eats a greasy hamburger every now and then and that he doesn’t care about that nutrition app. When I look at the Tour, I see cyclists of 1.80 meters with a weight of 60 kilograms. That is really not healthy.”
That’s the approach to nutrition I take too, Adrie, you know, it’s all about avoiding being “really not healthy” so you’ve just got to keep scranning those hamburgers, right?
Retired pro Nathan van Hooydonck responded to Adrie’s comments, suggesting that Mathieu is lucky to be able to eat a hamburger as, “If other riders do that, they are no longer competing to win.”
“Mathieu can go eat a hamburger because he is exceptionally talented. If other riders do that, they are no longer competing to win. You race to win and to get the best out of yourself, don’t you?”
Cav's Astana teammate fined for stopping to watch record-breaking win on roadside screen
One of the more bizarre stories to come out of the Tour so far…
Italian website Tuttobici reports that Davide Ballerini, Mark Cavendish’s Astana Qazaqstan teammate, was fined 200 Swiss francs for behaviour contrary to the image of cycling on the day the Manx Missile broke the stage wins record.
Why? Well, he stopped by the roadside during the finale to watch the sprint on a giant screen. How dare you, Davide.
"A TV camera is there to capture images and not to influence the race": Mark Cavendish blasts Tour de France motorbike rider for putting him "out the back" after mechanical, as record-breaking sprinter fined for drafting behind team car
Hooked vs hookless wheels at the Tour de France — which rims are the pro peloton hooked on in 2024?
TT day at the Tour
What a load of part timers. Only 25km on the menu at the Tour de France today…
A huge day in the GC fight. Can Jonas Vingegaard take back time on Tadej Pogačar? How will Remco Evenepoel go? Or will the Slovenian superstar extend his lead? All to play for this afternoon. Pogačar is the last rider off the start ramp at 4pm UK time.
Got the nose (and wallet) to sniff out a Tour de France stage win? Dylan Groenewegen’s bizarre Scicon Batman aero ‘beak’ finally available to buy… for just £300 – but why was it banned in the first place?
When your entire village comes out to watch you at the Tour
Everyone’s on the road (or finished) now, Victor Campenaerts’ current fastest time about to come under siege from the big hitters. Here are some of the more notable things to happen so far although, let’s face it, TT days are rarely that riveting. Poor Stefan Küng had some mechanical bad luck…
😫 Terrible for @stefankueng. The Swiss champion has a mechanical issue that’s costing him time!
😫 Terrible pour @stefankueng. Il est victime d’un ennui mécanique qui lui coûte du temps !#TDF2024 pic.twitter.com/hvbgJ4UXRk
— Tour de France™ (@LeTour) July 5, 2024
Meanwhile, Julien Bernard was living the dream, his entire village out on the climb to welcome him…
All the love for Julien Bernard 🥰@lidltrek #TDF2024 pic.twitter.com/b34LEYwgJN
— Eurosport (@eurosport) July 5, 2024
Remco Evenepoel wins Tour de France time trial by 12 seconds, as Tadej Pogačar takes time on Jonas Vingegaard and Primož Roglič
In the end just four riders could beat Victor Campenaerts’ time — Jonas Vingegaard, Primož Roglič, Tadej Pogačar and stage winner Remco Evenepoel. If you’re going to come fifth, that’s not a shabby quartet to lose to. It was clear not long after yellow jersey Pogačar had rolled down the start ramp at 4pm on the dot that the Big Four were going to head the stage standings, the only question over the order.
The TT world champion wins his first Tour stage!
With Tadej Pogačar finishing 12 seconds down, Remco Evenepoel wins stage 7 of the #TDF2024 pic.twitter.com/P2BCJH3Imr
— Eurosport (@eurosport) July 5, 2024
While Vingegaard started hot before appearing to fade, Evenepoel looked bulletproof, the TT world champion bettering Roglič and the Dane’s times and setting a benchmark that even Pogačar could not overhaul.
Hearts sank all over Belgium when Evenepoel signalled for the team car with two kilometres to go, before relief as the mechanical (perhaps chain troubles) was apparently fixed with a slam of the bike. When the yellow jersey crossed the line a winning margin of 12 seconds was confirmed, the Soudal Quick-Step rider cutting the gap to Pogačar. It was an otherwise successful day for UAE Team Emirates’ star, who took time on his compatriot Roglič and great rival Vingegaard.
It all means Pogačar remains in yellow, 33 seconds ahead of Remco, 1’15” up on Vingegaard and 1’36” up on Roglič heading into a weekend involving punchy hills and gravel.
Mark Cavendish makes history, Dylan Groenewegen's bizarre (and stage-winning) aero beak, and the weirdest things we’ve ever seen at the Tour de France
Time trial porn — Remco edition
For those of us who spent years watching Dan Martin, Nairo Quintana and Domenico Pozzovivo ride TTs…
aero /ˈɛːrəʊ/ adjective INFORMAL
aerodynamic.
“we softened the lines for a more aero look”
"This genuinely could kill somebody": Viral video of overenthusiastic Tour de France fan being pushed off mountain for running next to cyclists sparks debate online
You might have already seen the video doing the rounds on social media, it’s already been viewed nearly three million times on the ‘Cycling out of context’ Twitter account. Apparently filmed earlier this week on the Galibier stage of the Tour de France, it shows the moment an overenthusiastic spectator, you know, one of those ones you see all the time and shake your head at for running up the climbs just inches away from the riders.
Well, things took a turn…
— Cycling out of context (@OutOfCycling) July 4, 2024
Another spectator clearly not very impressed by the running gives them a nudge, and by nudge I mean — quite a significant shove, so much so the fan is sent tumbling off the mountain. When the camera returns back to the falling fan seconds later it shows they’d dropped even further down the slope.
And while plenty took pleasure in seeing what they viewed as a moment of mountain justice — a perfect dose of karma for an irritating blight on the sport — the point has also been made that, well, pushing someone off a mountain because you don’t like what they’re doing might not be wholly virtuous either.
Idk, the guy is in the same position as the other one was running. Not like he was staying away from the riders himself
— King Arthur 👑🇧🇷 (@crash22crash) July 4, 2024
Admittedly, sympathy was in the minority on this one…
Maybe just leave it to the authorities in future…
Reminds me of Bergen 2017 pic.twitter.com/76wZYDRKd5
— Melhus skatepark 🦐🦈 (@skateparken) July 4, 2024
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.
33 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
Sounds like we're both right - the organisation is indeed still proscribed, and the protests were silent and peaceful. Yes, there are people protesting and expressing sympathy with Hamas or shouting antisemitic slogans - but as I understand it the recent ones were not. As for critical mass being proscribed ... I would hope that's paranoia. Except that in the case of the JSO / XR folks there seemed to be a quick mutual escalation between them and government/ police when their actions were seen to be effective (causing a fuss). I still doubt this would happen in the case of cycle protests / gatherings, mostly because they aren't frequent or aiming to be as noisy. So most politicians don't see enough mileage in making it an "issue". But note there are already some who might. Such types may be increasingly gathered in Reform as some of the Conservatives migrate there.
Considering the fuss over £2 parking fees here https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c204p0pprvxo a £50 fine might be enough to make them vote for reform!
We are not. We are arresting people for holding up banners supporting a proscribed organisation, which the protestors are happily conflating with protesting against the Gaza genocide. Lets not pretend that CML will ever be proscibed. Especially since the Govt managed to Custard Pie themselves with PA.
You say it's proactive police work, but if they had to be asked to do it then there's no proactivity whatsoever really. Also, PCS suggests that Matthew Brennan was actually born in 2005, which makes his performances even more impressive.
Aargh bloody new site! Anyway Portobello road by Jock's Lodge - the north side actually has a proper separated cycle path (albeit with some issues) but the south side is a mix of "Lane behind the parked cars" and "bus lane". And of course - the latter had cars parked every 30 metres or so - and this is perfectly legal for most of the day and on weekends as the signage recorded. Pragmatism? Only in the sense of "I suppose we have to let the buses through some some times - if only to get them out of the way of drivers. But only at peak times!"
Unfortunately in many cases this has been devolved from the police, and even if you're alleging that the car got into the cycle infra by being illegally driven there you'll need evidence (a very sympathetic police officer to witness it, plus...) However in many cases this isn't even against the rules - even for "mandatory cycle lanes". See for example here: https://www.cyclinguk.org/blog/underhand-law-change-undermines-mandatory-cycle-lanes I was reminded of this when cycling west along Edinburgh's
Rendel, you're quoting some web site that is *heavily* summarising some textbook, which is not freely available. Even so, you have selectively quoted the summary, the remainder of which is: "A simple fracture can occur by walking into a fixed object (force required = 73N), whilst a simple fall through 1 m causing a frontal impact (510N) can also result in linear or mosaic fractures. Fractures have been absent when an impact force of 1314 N was recorded." Other information I find online suggests skull fractures correlate with impacts at 1 kN and above. The reality is likely complex and varied. I suspect your 73 N figure is very much at some strange low extreme (thin skull, and some other unstated factors - who knows).
RE: police concern about critical mass. This could start being serious activism (with consequences for the participants). If some bright spark in parliament (many have shown willing) notices this "causes disruption" (or say a party full of the same)... ... then it could be "into the JSO / Extinction Rebellion terrorist sin-bin with you". Can you be certain you *didn't* delay an emergency vehicle / someone going to a vital health-and- wellbeing-related appointment - even if indirectly because "causing congestion"? And slowing people down - that's "economic terrorism" isn't it? All that sounds a bit extreme, but we're already arresting folks for silently holding up non-sweary, non-offensive, not very threatening slogans. (I can hear "a laaaybour government...")
It's not 'the same thing', though, is it? You say yourself that it gets more out than those other methods. Which means there's going to be less left to dry out afterwards. If there's no advantage to getting more out if it doesn't get _all_ of it out, then by that logic you might as well not even bother shaking or towelling it, since those won't get all of it out either, so aren't any better than just ignoring it. Whether the extra amount it gets out is worth the price tag is a different question altogether.
33 thoughts on ““This genuinely could kill somebody”: Viral video of overenthusiastic Tour de France fan being pushed off mountain for running next to cyclists sparks debate online; Would you pay £1,000 for a pair of aero socks?; Election reaction + more on the live blog”
RIP “Plan for drivers”..
RIP “Plan for drivers”…hopefully.
Pub bike wrote:
Unlikely: Labour has said the same.
BBC wrote:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66264893
Also “the only party on the side of drivers”.
Maybe not over bike-bashing – but no additional help and being patronised? Sure.
At least they’ve said they’ll “Give mayors the power to create unified and integrated transport systems, and to promote active travel networks” – although some places appear to have already set about that! So it doesn’t exactly promise anything new? And what you get very much depends on the mayor!
Although ‘we need to reflect
Although ‘we need to reflect on that’ often means ‘this is really difficult but we hope if we ignore it long enough it’ll just go away’.
Maybe. “the only party on
Maybe. “the only party on the side of drivers” probably doesn’t mean “…but we are on the side of cyclists more” though!
We’ll see. Now they can do what they like will they keep to “tory-lite” or bring in somet new thinking? There will be some big issues to deal with – will they find time for a serious look at transport apart from “renationalise the railways” and “how can we get the ‘road tax’ tax back from electric cars”?
Generally I expect little from the top. Hopefully more local authorities can realise it’s to their advantage to find money and put it into cycling, rather than just dumping it into holes in the ground or speculating to try to bring in more income.
chrisonabike wrote:
No – I wouldn’t expect anything like that – more likely “…while cyclists aren’t important enough for us to care about either way”.
I imagine ‘on the side of drivers’ probably means keep the freeze on fuel duty (and hope oil prices come down because geopolitics), maybe some sort of gesture towards a scrappage scheme, and a few pennies for potholes. On ULEZ I suspect they’ll ‘reflect on’ it for a few years until it becomes the new normal, and then quietly forget about it.
chrisonabike wrote:
This is the key. Most of the roads cyclists will ride on in their communities will be the responsibility of the local authority not central government. What we want is for Westminster to set down minimum standards for acceptable infrastructure, encourage local authorities to actively look for opportunities to create it and not block them when they do.
Jetmans Dad wrote:
Yep.
Unfortunately “money from Central govt.” may be an issue. Now, that itself doesn’t mean they can’t shuffle the funding and find money if they wanted. Nor would extra money go to cycling in most places. It’s political choices. to some extent
As for “national standards” – that was my cry for a long time. However I’ve recently learned that in the most successful cycling country it may in fact work differently. Still digesting this one (and almost certainly “we can’t get there from here” anytime soon), but maybe worth a watch:
https://youtu.be/b4ya3V-s4I0?t=597
Surely at some point UCI will
Surely at some point UCI will need to revisit their rules on items being commercially available, if this is the end result (see also £300 aero beaks and >£50k track bikes). It makes a mockery of the rule if a company can just list an item on a website with an outrageous price and claim that makes it “available” if the reality is no-one in their right mind is going to buy it.
That said, I’m not quite sure what the solution is.
In general it appeals that pros use equipment which is comparable to that which is accessible to ordinary people – I think it makes their achievements more relatable. I also wonder if it’s better for the industry – even if you don’t buy the exact same thing, if they are similar you can see more potential for trickle down benefits. For example, the “standard” Tarmac frame looks very similar to the S-works version, so you can imagine a lot of the R&D is shared between them. But when you consider something like Ganna’s entirely 3D printed Pinarello track bike, it’s reasonable to question if that has anything in common with the off-the-shelf Bolide.
I did wonder about something along the lines of a requirement to sell a minimum number to the general public, or a requirement that the item be commercially viable (i.e. profitable based on sales to the general public). Although I don’t know how that could work for items that are new (pros will be using them before they have gone on sale to the general public).
To add to your point – the
To add to your point – the lower tier Tarmacs come out of exactly the same mould, but use older FACT10 generation carbon layup techniques initially introduced in earlier S-Works models. There’s very little difference in frame weight but there is a small noticeable difference in stiffness/compliance.
Are they faster than the £30
Are they faster than the £30 socks, or any of the other brands aero socks costing less than £100? A gold-plated bike could cost a fortune, but would that be an issue, or only if a pro rode it?
You pay £30 for socks?
You pay £30 for socks?
OnYerBike wrote:
Or give the teams a budget cap that has to be accounted against full RRP, so anything priced unfeasibly high to prevent normal people buying it also has the same effect on them.
And if the socks are so good that spending a grand on them really were to be better value than spending it on something else, then they can still do that.
And you end up like F1 or
And you end up like F1 or football where you just need a good accountant who knows the loopholes in the rules.
Cycling teams always tell us how poor in terms of cashflow they are anyway, none of them spend this kind of money on this stuff, it’s gifted by sponsors.
“Aero socks”???
“Aero socks”???
They only weigh 100g !
They only weigh 100g !
I wouldn’t hold your breath.
I wouldn’t hold your breath. I don’t remember the previous Labour government being that favourable toward cyclists. Active travel (like other green measures) is cheap which means it ain’t great for either GDP or tax and, like the government that has just been kicked out, Labour governments run out of money. Hope I’m totally wrong!
Yup! It’s many of the same
Yup! It’s many of the same people that voted Conservative last time that voted for them, Im sure they don’t think the Great British Public has had a conversion experience! (They just grew tired of the last lot and Labour slipped on some bluer clothes and moved to meet them).
I think some longer term labour folks also have aversion to the bike – or rather they note the “unfair” class complaints eg. the rich are still driving but we can barely afford it! Or want to appear supporters of the “working man” (and it is usually gendered thus) with van.
If people are fitter and
If people are fitter and healthier, they will need the NHS less so that will benefit the public purse.
The last labour government
The last labour government set a target of halving road deaths in 10 years. Everyone scoffed and laughed. They hit the target in 9 years, in the face of wailing about speed cameras being there solely to collect revenue.
I’ve also just seen Starmer’s speech. Basically, his won’t be a government of culture wars. As cyclists and active travel have been the ‘enemy’ in these culture wars, this is very, very welcome news. I’m sure Starmer’s government will let me down on active travel and other issues – but they will be much, much better than the last lot.
I wouldn’t trust Starmer as
I wouldn’t trust Starmer as far as I could throw him.
Has he stop flip-flopping over what a female is?
At the end of the day, they are all lying scum.
The aggressor in the pushing
The aggressor in the pushing incident certainly wins hypocrite of the day, the guy running alongside the cyclists was running in the same channel as the aggressor was standing, so if the runner shouldn’t have been there the aggressor shouldn’t have been standing there either. Yes the idiots who run really close to the cyclists are a scourge, but this one looks fairly innocuous compared to many. The fact that the aggressor didn’t just grab the runner but threw him off the side of the drop and then started swearing at him makes one suspect that he’s one of the distressingly common type who thinks he’s a bit tasty and loves an opportunity to use violence against others in a situation where he can claim he was acting in the interest of the riders.
These incidents can be
These incidents can be interperated in so many ways
I feel the shover was at the side of the road cheering and encouraging, he had space to step back safely if required. The runner was moving rapidly without paying attention to where he was going.
The shove was an understandable defensive reaction to someone who was in the process of running into the shover, if he hadn’t pushed he would have been knocked over by the idiot who wasn’t looking where he was going.
EK Spinner wrote:
Although he was more interested in hurling abuse at the other guy than doing so, and nearly took a rider out as a result.
As you say, the “shover” did
As you say, the “shover” did have space to step back safely if required so he could have got out of the runner’s way rather than take the violence option. If you look at the runner before he reaches the shover, he’s actually tracking in a straight line very close to the edge of the road and not interfering with the riders at all, it’s only the shover’s decision to stand his ground and push the guy over that creates a problem and nearly interferes with the riders.
EK Spinner wrote:
I agree. Looked more like an instinctive push to protect himself. The swearing possibly very much the same.
The Election looks positive
The Election looks positive to very positive.
But there’s a hell of a lot of lobbying work for us to do, starting with getting the 2014-promised review of road safety kicked off in the first King’s Speech.
Now is the time to start.
Pity about Labour splitting their own vote and letting IDS back in.
Stonking good TT stage today,
Stonking good TT stage today, engrossing to see a full set of Galacticos up against each other.
A very enjoyable watch on a great day.
At the end of the day, they
At the end of the day, they are all lying scum
Tory apologist alert! We’ve had Johnson and Truss, we’ve had the bent betting on the election date, country will be destroyed by Labour ‘spend, spend, spend’ doom-mongering etc. etc., so Tory Damage Limitation BlackOps launches ‘they’re all as bad as each other’ in a futile attempt to cover-up the truly monumental scale of the Tory misdeeds.
Julien Bernard has also been
Julien Bernard has also been handed a fine for a similar heinous crime as Davide Ballerini. How dare he stop and kiss his wife. Very unseemly.
Is this anyone’s bike ?
Is this anyone’s bike ?
https://youtu.be/EbOkmhSnpYU?t=488
Does that ‘P’ stand for
Does that ‘P’ stand for ‘Passed on the 60th attempt’?
Pushed off a mountain…??
Pushed off a mountain…?? Please don’t feel the need to resort to clickbait