Near Miss of the Day 870: Driver mistimes overtake of cyclist, stalls car... blares horn at rider

I wouldn't choise to cycle on that road either but it looks the typical Irish rural connector road and there won't be much choice if you want to go from A to B.  Rather than a barriered DC's these tend to be short sections 2+1 unbarriered roads (2 lanes one direction and 1 lane the other way) with the 2 lane section facilitating a crawler lane to allow traffic to overtake slower moving vehicles and remove the driver fustration.  It doesn't seem to have worked in this situation

Jimmy Ray Will wrote:

I also think you have to cut the driver a bit of slack as they were on foreign plates so potentially not used to driving on the left.

It's an Irish plate (10 = year, C = Cork, 9631 = 9631st vehicle registered in Cork that year), in Ireland.

Rendel Harris wrote:

Jimmy Ray Will wrote:

I also think you have to cut the driver a bit of slack as they were on foreign plates so potentially not used to driving on the left.

It's an Irish plate (10 = year, C = Cork, 9631 = 9631st vehicle registered in Cork that year), in Ireland.

Not only that, it actually happened in Co Cork, so driver is more than well at home.

Ah ha... that makes more sense. Also helps explain why the cyclist would choose to ride along such a road. 

Yes, but none of that fits the accepted narrative!

Pretty sure most of the accepted narrative in the story, both from how it was reported by both the OP, the article and comments were:
Driver had to bail overtake and brake.
Van driver was too close to car in front.
Van driver did a shit manouvre for the car behind.
Car driver stalled car as forgot to change gear down.
Car driver shouldn't have beeped horn at cyclist who did nothing wrong. 

Now what is so different then Jimmy's take? (apart from them being foreigners because he hadn't actually read the article to see it was taken in Ireland). Obviously Jimmy seems to think that because it is in NMOTD, it must have been harmful to the cyclist but sometimes they are just used to show weird driving around cyclists. 
 

Jimmy Ray Will wrote:

The only thing to take offence to was the use of the horn, which was innappropriate; I guess they were feeling pretty stupid and wanted to take it out on someone.  

But isn't it worrying that someone driving a two tonne motor vehicle around was "feeling pretty stupid and wanted to take it out on someone"?  That path leads to punishment passes and their ilk.

Yes and no.

It's basically the human condition to blame others for your own shortcomings. I can imagine the driver felt rightfully short changed, and then stupid, and with no one else to blame, protested with their horn at the cyclist.

I'd rather they did a blast on the horn rather than bottle it up for the next poor soul just minding their business, or as you say, used other, more aggressive means to vent. 

Jimmy Ray Will wrote:

I'd rather they did a blast on the horn rather than bottle it up for the next poor soul just minding their business, or as you say, used other, more aggressive means to vent.

Harm miminization is good.  Not sure it's a zero sum game / that "conservation of anger" applies though.  (The latter is a common theory - the anger must go somewhere!  But... where did it come from?  If it can be created, perhaps it can also dissipate?)

My only evidence for the above is observation and hearing about how some probation "anger management / anti road rage" courses work.  Apparently it's essentially the same technique as with kids - if you can only distract them for a few seconds and break the "emotion-action" link quite often the moment passes.

I think "pattern recognition" helps deal with some of those emotional triggers - if you see a cyclist and think "could be my child / parent / partner".  I think that's one of the virtuous circles / feedback loops you get if you can get to "mass cycling".  If...

Jimmy Ray Will wrote:

That was unfortunate driving, but I'd argue the driver was more the victim of circumstance than anything malicious / incompetent. 

Odd take.

Did you miss the initial cause of the problem where the driver failed to notice the cyclist and needed to do an emergency brake?

Pure incompetence and worthy of a careless driving/Driving without due care and attention charge if it had been in the UK.

Pure incompetence and worthy of a careless driving/Driving without due care and attention charge if it had been in the UK

It may have been worthy of such a charge, but almost certainly the charge would not have been made- despite the implication, the UK police in general, and Lancashire/ Scotland in particular, are no better than the Irish

Another common belief.  "They were unlucky" ("unfortunate" here) / "There but for the grace of God go I" / "it could have happened to anyone".

True in one sense - because it happens.  However my concern is with is the tacit acceptance that a) humans en-mass consistently fail to drive to the basic standards they're licenced to (obviously true) and yet b) this is acceptable / inevitable.

In fact setting the bar higher / retesting / stopping those shown to be incapable is seen as unfair / a denial of people's rights.

I'm not sure there's a good way of shifting that belief.  At least, not without exactly the "two systems" approach which works to make certain human failures less likely in the first place and minimises the harm if there is a crash.

I'm not sure there's a good way of shifting that belief

Just like the widespread belief at Lancashire Constabulary, and doubtless other forces as well, that it's impossible to close pass a cyclist close enough for it to be an offence- even if they hit you, it's only a 'momentary loss of concentration'. The only way to shift it is through the law, a concept Lancashire Constabulary is loath to accept as an alternative to the present practice of 'the law is what we say it is'. Someone declared on here a few weeks ago that he would be 'very surprised if the police policy of refusing to tell victims of vehicular assaults on cyclists the outcome of police action (because they're only witnesses) were to continue'. Well, it is continuing in Lancashire over this (where there was almost certainly no action at all, but the police are trying to cover that up)

https://upride.cc/incident/4148vz_travellerschoicecoach_closepass/

No, but I saw it differently. I don't think they failed to notice the cyclist, rather their initial focus was slotting into a gap in the outside lane. The closer their speed to that of vehicles in that outside lane, the greater the chance  of finding a gap.  

I would argue that is reasonable initial stance to take in the circumstances.

I get the viewpoint that all motorists should always accept being held up by cyclists in all cases, with no ill feeling, ever, but I also accept in the real world that's an unrealistic and rather entitled view to take. I don't think many of us would accept simply pulling over and getting off the road each time you hear a car approaching from behind. 

As an aside, that was hardly an emergency stop.  

cyclisto wrote:

I used the novice rider jinking theatre to win a few decimetres of additional space, but still felt it was dangerous.

Apologies - a tangent, that this sentence reminded me of. A few days ago, I was following along behind an eScooter that was in the cycle lane*
There were a few cars that close passed me, then proceeded to give the eScooter a wide pass. I still don't know what to make of that. Could be because I was wearing a helmet and the eScooter rider wasn't? Could be the fact it was an eScooter?

*Yes, I know they are currently illegal on public roads in the UK and I have mixed feelings about this particularly rider - at least he wasn't on the footpath harassing pedestrians like many others!

I must say I've noticed similar in London. I assume it's partly because scooter riders register in the driver's mind as upright people, so more like pedestrians, around whom most drivers are more careful, and also because in the short time that escooters have been around they have earned a pretty solid (and frankly largely deserved) reputation as the wobbliest, most unpredictable road users out there.

Out during my lunch time walk, some time ago, I was treated to the following scene, which still makes me chuckle (apologies for the swearing):

Section of road, with car parking spaces on the left, some cars in them. Car driving alongside them and indicates to pull into one of the spaces. An eScooter rider, from behind the car, decides now is his chance to get past, so swerves between the now slowly turning car and the parked cars. Car driver honks their horn, so the eScooter rider turns around (the eScooter was still travelling away, he simply turned to face the opposite direction) and starts mouthing off:
"F**k you! F**k off! You f**king w****r! I'm a good f**king driver. You should learn how to f**king drive!"
all while not looking where he was going and slowly veering into oncoming traffic....

For some reason I'm not thrilled by the e-scooter "plague" (not plague).  However people gonna do what they do and I could easily see them becoming a dominant form of transport over bikes.  Maybe even walking?  The advantages are several - they're very small (so storable / portable) and don't take up much road space.   The "user interface" is pretty simple - very easy to get on / off, you stand upright, people are using existing spaces (footways) and not putting in much effort.  You just have to not fall sideways.

They might even reduce a bit of driving - not entirely convinced about that though.

What I do wonder about is exactly what you say - or rather a) they look extremely vulnerable to surface defects (potholes) and b) it seems there's lots of pedestrian interaction (potential conflict).

Can't stop, got to go find my tabard...

I have hit during nightime at big pothole-trench that the bike slided into it. I didn't have time to react at all but I was very surprised how steady the bike felt and I didn't fell. My heavy big diameter wheelset acted as a good gyro, and I believe that if I rode a 8" wheeled e-scooter, I would have probably crashed. So I understand drivers giving more space to e-scooters, as they are more likely to lose their balance compared to bikes.

I almost always wear a helmet, so cannot judge whether without it I would have been less closely passed.

pre-regular-cycling, as a drivist, I wouldn't have considered a how unstable a vehicle would be based on their wheel size (I do now!) - my decision would have been based on how they looked.

This particular eScooter rider, to me, looked competent. He wasn't weaving all over the place as some do and was going at a reasonable speed (I was doing about 35kmph and was catching him slowly) I wish I had kept the video footage of him!

There is no video directly in the article, you need to follow the link to Twitter.

Twitter appears to be locking stuff down, so it may not play anymore without logging in/signing up?