‘Road Rage: Cars v Bikes’: BBC’s Panorama episode receives mixed reception (+ statistics questioned); Newly crowned hill climb champ Illi Gardner smashes Sa Calobra QOM; Cyclists warned of runaway oversized baubles; Close pass flag + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Dangerous drivers, potholes and... oversized baubles?! The latest danger for cyclists on Britain's roads
It’s that time of year… Halloween’s passed (if that even counts as a notable calendar date) and one of my now-muted group chats has this week begun debating the best Christmas songs… they did festive movie rankings in October!!! Hopefully the World Cup will bring them back to more comfortable discussion…
Anyway, more importantly for us two-wheeled travellers, there has been a warning the Christmas period could bring an extra danger to cyclists using the roads… nope, not darker evenings, drivers taking a chance after the Christmas party, or even icy conditions… nope, today’s warning is to look out for runaway oversized baubles… no, really…
WATCH OUT FOR THE BAUBLES
pic.twitter.com/e7cwIZEwNW— Jeremy Vine (@theJeremyVine) November 1, 2022
The close pass flag
🚩 it’s a red flag pic.twitter.com/V0BSFx8RxG
— Mamnick™ (@Mamnick) November 2, 2022
"Overall I think it's fairly good in showing the dangers and highlighting how awful it is for people cycling... shame they have to have a shock journalist implying that cyclists need to be 'poked'..."
Watching that Panorama Show. Overall I think it’s fairly good in showing the dangers and highlighting how awful it is for people cycling.
The presenter is very good. Shame they have to have a shock journalist implying that cyclists need to be ‘poked’https://t.co/9siBtbHzs5
1/
— Adam Bronkhorst (@AdamBronkhorst) November 2, 2022
Road safety campaigner Adam Bronkhorst agrees it is “fairly good” just with a couple of disappointing moments…
Very nice to see some familiar faces for cycling being interviewed & being voices of reason
Duncan Dollimore for @WeAreCyclingUK @Subversivite for @London_Cycling & @MikeyCycling
Overall the program is pretty good & doesn’t play on the usual ‘confrontation’ & ‘tribalism’
end/
— Adam Bronkhorst (@AdamBronkhorst) November 2, 2022
'Road Rage: Cars v Bikes': BBC's Panorama episode receives mixed reception
So, it’s finally here… BBC’s Panorama episode titled ‘Road Rage: Cars v Bikes’ has dropped on iPlayer ahead of its broadcast on BBC One at 8pm tonight and you might even recognise some of the video clips from a certain Near Miss of the Day series…
We spoke to the episode’s producer, as well as reporter Richard Bilton, to contribute, which is why there are more than a few clips from this website included. Clearly, there are aspects we would rather weren’t part of the episode… Rod Liddle’s section springs to mind, while the title ‘Road Rage: Cars v Bikes’ has also landed some criticism.
We’ll have a full road.cc piece analysing the episode, as well as a podcast episode with Bilton coming later today. Of course, we’ll also keep you updated with all the reaction here on the live blog…
“Good in parts”
The Guardian’s Peter Walker suggested the investigation is “good in parts” — Bilton talks to Cycling UK, the London Cycling Campaign and “very effectively shows how commonly dangerous driving affects you when cycling”… BUT raised concerns about the stats used, notably a third of drivers thinking cyclists shouldn’t be on the road (figures already reported with clicky headlines by the Daily Mail and Cycling Weekly)… AND questioned the title…”There’s this weird compulsion to make everything about cycling into a battle. As others have said, it’s less a battle than a massacre.”
So unless I’m told otherwise, it seems Panorama felt the need to bulk out the show with some fairly hair-raising and divisive non-statistics based on…. an open-ended online poll supposedly giving the views of “motorists”. Really? That’s pretty weak stuff.
— Peter Walker (@peterwalker99) November 2, 2022
Keep your eyes peeled for our podcast episode with Richard Bilton which goes live later today…
BBC broadcasts Rod Liddle clip from Panorama episode during radio news bulletin
If you’ve been listening to BBC radio this morning you might have noticed the Panorama episode’s statistics, questioned by Peter Walker in an earlier live blog post, being read out during news bulletins…
What the f**k was that @BBC6Music? A news story about people deliberately riding too close to cyclists and your soundbite was somebody heaping all of the blame on the cyclists? Does licensing stop car drivers from speeding or jumping red lights?
— Simon P. (@thepuncheur) November 2, 2022
Said ‘soundbite’ of choice? Yep… it’s Rod Liddle’s input to the episode…
Others have reported hearing the clip on Radio 2 and 4, we heard it during Lauren Laverne’s Radio 6 Music show when a newsreader said:
A survey of motorists suggests there is widespread dislike of cyclists. More than 12,000 drivers were questioned and one-in-three told the BBC’s Panorama that cyclists shouldn’t be on the road. A quarter admitted deliberately driving too close to them. The government is spending billions of pounds encouraging more people to get on their bikes, the columnist Rod Liddle thinks more regulation of cyclists is needed…
Right… cue the soundbite from the episode (you’ll have to read it, which might be a plus if you don’t wish to hear this particular voice)…
Liddle: “Possibly some form of registration or indeed make it the law to use cycle lanes where they have been provided, I think that is one of the things that really gets up the nose of people. And I would enforce speed limits and pick them up for running red lights”…
Panorama’s ‘polling’ has been criticised this morning… check out the earlier blog post for more from the Guardian’s Peter Walker on the matter…
Finally (I promise): this is the official answer on what the “polling” comprises. Yup, it’s an online, open survey. So not representative or scientific at all. The press release does call it a “survey”, but it has no credibility at all. pic.twitter.com/3Rak8NJw2q
— Peter Walker (@peterwalker99) November 2, 2022
So in conclusion, based on these BBC news bulletins… the problem is a quarter of motorists admit deliberately driving too close to cyclists… so let’s get Rod Liddle on to tell everyone the people being driven too close to should be registered for the privilege…
Yep, that’s this Rod Liddle…
'Road rage' on BBC panorama: fuelling the fire or raising awareness? We interview the presenter on the road.cc Podcast
As promised here’s our chat with Panorama reporter Richard Bilton about the episode…
Review: Panorama – Road Rage: Cars v Bikes
Right, we’ll round up some of your reaction later on, but for now we’ll move onto some other things happening in the cycling world today…
That is after we’ve shared road.cc Simon’s review of the episode…
Haters will say it's fake...
Super great dad. 😂 pic.twitter.com/nqa9ViuJDz
— Figen (@TheFigen_) November 1, 2022
Newly crowned hill climb champ Illi Gardner smashes Sa Calobra QOM
What a hero Illi Gardner is. Three days after winning the women’s event at the National Hill Climb Championships, the climbing phenom has gone and smashed the QOM up one of the most hotly contested Strava segments in the world — Sa Calobra.
> Most competitive Strava segment in the world? Ed Laverack smashes Sa Calobra KOM
Clocking 29:09 up the iconic Mallorcan climb, Gardner beat previous QOM holder, Swedish pro triathlete Sara Svensk’s time by 50 seconds and went almost two minutes faster than Emma Pooley’s best.
> Weird and wonderful bikes from the National Hill Climb Championships
Covering the 9.44km, which averages seven per cent, at an average speed of 19.4km/h (12mph), Gardner’s power data shows she held 264w, 5.4w/kg based on her Strava weight…
Happy Wednesday...
Brian Cookson: More heads have to roll at British Cycling
Former UCI and British Cycling president Brian Cookson had some strong words for cycling’s governing body in the UK, saying he has “no confidence” in chair Frank Slevin and more “heads have to roll” following on from CEO Brain Facer’s departure.
> British Cycling CEO Brian Facer leaves post with immediate effect
“The chair [Frank Slevin] needs to take some responsibility for this,” Cookson told Cycling Weekly. “I have no confidence in him to continue, I think he should go. Now we have a structure imposed on us by UK Sport and the reality is we have a chairman who has effectively come from outside the sport, presumably appointed for his business expertise.
“The problem as I see it is that we’re governed by people who don’t really have a background in that sport, pastime, activity and I don’t know what they’re motivated by.
“Frank Slevin is almost invisible from what I can see. I think he needs to take some responsibility for some of these unfortunate controversies that have happened during his tenure. I do think that it seems inexplicable to me that the chairman and the board were unaware of the implications of the things that have happened and that have been so controversial.
“I think that some heads have to roll.”
Facer’s departure by “mutual agreement” came just weeks after British Cycling announced a toxically controversial eight-year partnership with petrochemicals giant Shell.
The WorldTour's leaders in subtle and tasteful product placement are at it again
A podcast studio with a difference 🎙️
Check out how @GeraintThomas86 and @LukeRowe1990 got on as they recorded the latest episode of @Watts_Occurring from inside the @INEOSGrenadier. pic.twitter.com/CawN80CPEl
— INEOS Grenadiers (@INEOSGrenadiers) November 2, 2022
Nothing says cycling like the inside of a 4×4…
(Or on the bonnet)
What did you make of Panorama 'Road Rage: Cars v Bikes'?
*Spoiler alert if you’re waiting for the prime time BBC One viewing*
That was a joke, by the way, before anyone gets back in the comments to call me a self-important joker for suggesting people might actually be avoiding what happens for the full ‘live’ experience…
Anyway, not sure any of the above was necessary… onto your comments and reaction before I live blog myself down another midweek avenue of nonsense…
eburtthebike: “Well, the Panorama thing was nowhere near as bad as I thought it was going to be, but as others have pointed out, it still had significant flaws. For instance pretending that Rod Liddle was in any way an authoritative source, or that their online survey was the least bit valid.
“Neither did they compare the amounts spent on cycling with the amounts spent on other transport infrastructure to put it into context, or mention the police data which shows that it is overwhelmingly the driver at fault in cyclist/motor vehicle collisions.
“So while it could have been much, much worse, it could have been so much better. Still, at least it’s an improvement from the BBC’s normal line for the past forty years of ‘two wheels bad, four wheels good’ approach. Maybe they’ll even actually commission a series about cycling and why it is so good for you, your neighbourhood and the planet.*
“*Just a little joke I thought I’d throw in for my own amusement.”
HoarseMann: “Good to see some road.cc NMotD clips highlighting the issue. This is a bit better than some of the other programmes on this topic, but still too much framing the problem as a balanced difference of opinions.
“Letting Rod Liddle mouth off unchallenged is a low point, along with some Highway Code change inaccuracies (cyclists can now ride in the middle of the road) and the London van driver (that cyclist should be in the bus lane so that they’re out of the way).
“Illegal driving and the failure of the police to enforce the law is the root cause. Difficulty getting justice was lightly covered, but the lack of enforcement for careless driving around cyclists didn’t get a look in.”
Anyone else got any thoughts on the programme?
Until tomorrow...
Bring me the mountains pic.twitter.com/Bl0nrpvqCE
— Zlatan Ibrahimović (@Ibra_official) November 1, 2022
We’ll leave you with a final word from Zlatan Ibrahimovic… (don’t think we didn’t see that helmet to the Swede’s right)… presumably quoting Pantani or Quintana…
2 November 2022, 09:04
2 November 2022, 09:04
2 November 2022, 09:04
2 November 2022, 09:04
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.
76 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
I'll counter that by saying the Bryton 750se I have drives me nuts at times. Inconsistantly picks up on routes created on Komoot and the app re-syncs every few seconds when trying to set up the device and sends me back to the home screen. The most infuriating one is that I turned live track on. Once. It now won't turn off and repeatedly flags up the live track is starting, and then disconnecting every few seconds whilst riding. I haven't timed it but it wouldn't suprise me if 10-20% of the time the the screen is covered with an error message. That's been about 6 weeks now. Other than that it's great :/
RE: Police launch road safety operation... by clamping down on cyclists using footbridge Meanwhile in Glasgow, Police Scotland are riding their motorbikes over the pedestrian and cyclists only bridge. https://x.com/FietserGlasgow/status/2065106152917012523?s=20
@Paul J Van Schip certainly seems a bit of a dick, but he's a European and multiple World Champion on the track, pretty sure you don't get there without having some talent in your legs.
Poor Vincent cannot get over the simple fact that given the choice people prefer dedicated cycling spaces, rather than pretending to be cars like vehicular cyclists.
What is the point of the fancy air sensor if it can't account for changing weather conditions?? If all you care about is a delayed approximation of aerodynamic watts in steady conditions, you don't need any special sensors for that. Just your speed on a decently flat course is enough to approximate rolling resistance and drivetrain losses. And the rest must be aero. If you assume a less aero body position at the same watts, your speed will drop while rolling resistance also drops, which means approximated aero watts goes up. And that's enough to demonstrate what you've shown in your testing protocol ("I sat upright and the number went up a little while later").
Your correction is accurate - it's almost always been "the (lack of) thought that (doesn't) count". "Massive" - less than a billion a year spent on active travel (trying to catch up / building a network across the entire country) Not massive - 6 billion every year (2026-2030) spent on road *maintenance* of existing "already built, goes everywhere, very convenient" road network for inactive travel Ultimately the reason "cycle infra" is *needed* is those unbelievably colossal amounts spent every year (and for more than a century now) on making mass motoring not just viable but apparently the "best choice" for most journeys. As the Dutch and others have shown, the majority of people *are* prepared to cycle and even mix with very light, slow local motor traffic *if* cycling is also made safe and convenient for the whole of their journey (including secure parking at both ends). (The history of the financial drivers of the current situation are a complex topic but note that while people complain about "crumbling roads" and underfunded motor infra - with some reason - by us continuing the fuel duty escalator freeze (for example) we're actually helping motorists pay *even less* for that activity / subsidising more of the cost of driving than ever.)
yes, but people will still object - which was my point.
So ' Priority of Road Users' and 1.5 metre clearance at 30mph has been been reduced to 'sharing'? NCN route 2 here in South Hams is an absolute scream with white vans, tractors and total idiots who refuse,or are totally incapable,to reverse on high Devon banked lanes ...means you have to get off and pedal back to a passing place....could be at that all day...so I don't bother...
@MaxiMinimalist Agreed. The big problem I see now is today's parents grew up being driven to their schools, and therefore, see private motor vehicles as the only viable form of transport. The vast majority of UK infant and primary schools have a catchment area that is within easy walking distance from home to school. Yet, the traffic caused by pupils being driven to/from school is astonishing. Banishing the "School Run" should be a priority for all schools.
When I was a kid (that was during the previous millenium when phones were connected to a plug in the wall), I rode my bicycle to school, music academy, sport grounds, parties even during the winter. The government didn't have to spend, correct that, didn't have to think of spending massive amounts of money to build cycling specific infrastructures. Over the past 3 or 4 decades, cars have grown bigger, taller, safer (for their drivers) and faster. Meanwhile, motorists have become abusive, aggressive, hypersensitive to people moving on two wheels, aka cyclists. Spending billions upon billions on new infrastructure won't address the crux of the matter. Sadly.
76 thoughts on “‘Road Rage: Cars v Bikes’: BBC’s Panorama episode receives mixed reception (+ statistics questioned); Newly crowned hill climb champ Illi Gardner smashes Sa Calobra QOM; Cyclists warned of runaway oversized baubles; Close pass flag + more on the live blog”
I tought The Prisoner was
I tought The Prisoner was supposed to be fiction…
NickSprink wrote:
That’s what they want you to believe….
essexian wrote:
Sir, we are ‘They’
NickSprink wrote:
So who is Number 1…?
So who is Number 1…?
My wife calls me “Number 2.”
My wife calls me “Number 2.“
Not sure why as its both our first marriages?
essexian wrote:
Even stranger is that your wife calls me “Number 3”
Awavey wrote:
You are, Number Six
I’m more like Number 42
I’m more like Number 36 or was it 86, or even 8 🙂
I’d be 42, answer to life universe and everything, but they werent terribly consistent in keeping the numbers pinned to the same characters through the series. Deliberately I’m sure.
Awavey wrote:
That’s Angela Browne playing Number 86. She also appeared in an episode of Danger Man (amongst many other TV appearances).
Magic! Moore of this!
Magic! Moore of this!
chrisonatrike wrote:
https://paleymatters.org/alan-moore-remembers-patrick-mcgoohans-the-prisoner-part-1-c2d2daad0c33
https://paleymatters.org/alan-moore-remembers-patrick-mcgoohans-the-prisoner-part-2-93aadbfb11e2
Is that Alan Moore?
Is that Alan Moore?
(edit) Sorry – didn’t read further before posting my comment.
brooksby wrote:
No, it’s just a picture of him
Panorama Road Rage: Cars vs
Panorama Road Rage: Cars vs Bikes
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001dj03/panorama-road-rage-cars-v-bikes
Good to see some road.cc NMotD clips highlighting the issue. This is a bit better than some of the other programmes on this topic, but still too much framing the problem as a balanced difference of opinions.
Letting Rod Liddle mouth off unchallenged is a low point, along with some highway code change inaccuracies (cyclists can now ride in the middle of the road) and the London van driver (that cyclist should be in the bus lane so that they’re out of the way).
Illegal driving and the failure of the police to enforce the law is the root cause. Difficulty getting justice was lightly covered, but the lack of enforcement for careless driving around cyclists didn’t get a look in.
Is it good though ? If the
Is it good though ? If the result is people who’ve seen it still say its framing the debate wrong, quoting dubious statistics and uses “experts” (as motormouths?) like Rod Liddle.
All it does is give an air of legitimacy to a claim that the producers can cite that they made sure it was balanced.
I’d have steered well clear, like Boardman does with these media requests to get involved, as you cant shift the narrative or get the reality of a cycling view point across in the edit.
Remember this Panorama episode isnt about really tackling the issue, exposing the problem, like it might have done 30 years ago when it was about serious investigative journalism, it’s about producing content filler to the schedules that attracts an audience.
Awavey wrote:
I didn’t think it was good – I spent more time wincing than nodding sagely!
What I thought was interesting, is how they showed the presenter being subjected to close passes himself.
Now, if they did a follow-up programme, where they submit close pass reports to the various police forces and show the difficulty in getting any meaningful action, that would be useful investigative journalism!
HoarseMann wrote:
I haven’t watched it yet but this was to be expected. It’s what passes for “balanced” journalism at the BBC.
IanMK wrote:
They seem to think that “balanced” means giving equal time to crazy swivel-eyed loons and logical examination of the facts. However, we know that the BBC seems to have a secret policy against cycling whilst relentlessly pushing electric cars as the solution to everything.
hawkinspeter wrote:
To be fair he was on his best behaviour, and unlike his newspaper and media columns, he made his completely irrelevant, misinformed bilge sound almost logical.
I know exactly what you mean,
I know exactly what you mean, when I heard he was on I feared the worst, he was still talking tripe but without the usual dollop of maliciousness.
To involve Rod Liddle is
To involve Rod Liddle is bizarre and shows how poor BBC journalism is these days. Liddle
lives in Florida andhas no expertise in road safety.How someone like him gets an invite onto what is supposed to be a serious reporting program is beyond me.
Are you sure about the
Are you sure about the Florida bit or confusing him with the other bast
ionard of Right Wing columnists and approrpriately monickerd Littlejohn.Ah yes, I think you are right
Ah yes, I think you are right. I was mixing up Littlejohn and Liddle. Both out of the same mould.
We all make mistakes (20
We all make mistakes (20 months pregnant doh).
As for why invite him on to comment, anyone who “jokes” about hanging a wire at neck height to behead cyclists is a totally balanced view. I suspect Panorama didn’t mention that when introducing him.
Panorama should justify why
Panorama should justify why someone like Liddle is qualified to be invited onto the programme. His track record in abuse and offensive comments is pretty comprehensive. Hardly a beacon of reason.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Liddle#Allegations_of_misogyny_and_racism
sean1 wrote:
I’m afraid it’s all part of the BBC’s desperate attempt to appear balanced after so many attacks from the right accusing them of bias: if you run an article about racism, you have to invite a racist, if you run an article about the planet being round, you have to invite a flat earther. It doesn’t seem to matter how ridiculous someone’s stance is, or how little they are qualified to comment on a subject, as long as they can tick the “balance” box they’re happy.
I bet you don’t see many pro
I bet you don’t see many pro-vaxxers or communists or even just ‘vaguely left wingers’ on Talk TV and GB News etc, though… You know: for balance.
I found something which
I found something which suggests that Liddle lives (or at least a few years ago lived) in the otherwise pleasant North Yorkshire seaside town of Saltburn-by-the-Sea.
sean1 wrote:
programme
Ooops. That is why I am not
Ooops. That is why I am not a journalist of the calibre of Liddle. 🙂
I’ve always thought the word
I’ve always thought the word “whore” was inappropriately negative when applied to prostitutes. After all, where all things are equal, prostitution supplies a service for a price and no one else gets hurt.
Whereas the word whore used in a derogatory way with the likes of Liddle would be much more appropriate. Pursuing a faithless and unworthy desire, for monetary gain, to spew bile at many for the entertainment of scum.
I won’t be giving credence to a program that includes the worthless thoughts of that scumbag. He has nothing worthy to offer on the subject.
JustTryingToGetFromAtoB wrote
Liddle is closer to the Middle English hore, meaning “filth, slime, moral corruption”. As it happens I know people who (to their regret) know him, apparently he is every bit as nasty in real life as his public persona would suggest.
Rendel Harris wrote:
Liddle is closer to the Middle English hore, meaning “filth, slime, moral corruption”. As it happens I know people who (to their regret) know him, apparently he is every bit as nasty in real life as his public persona would suggest.— JustTryingToGetFromAtoB
I’m shocked I tells you, shocked. Though I reckon good advice is that when people show you the type of person they are, believe them. Also, cheers for the addition to the word bank.
I am not a number, I AM A
I am not a number, I AM A FREE MAN!*
* I say ‘free’, I of course accept that I am shackled by modern society, by the moral boundaries that encirlce us all, forcing (most) of us to comply with ‘societal norms’ that visibly or invisibly limit our choices and restirct our behaviours!
Dicklexic wrote:
I hate to go all swdlxer, but
I hate to go all swdlxer, but shouldn’t that be
?
Be seeing you…
Red flag on a stick
Red flag on a stick
brooksby wrote:
My trailer flag inadvertently fell to this angle a few months ago when I was on holiday on the Isle of Wight. I only realised because I got honked at by passing motorists and had a van driver on the other side of the road lean out of his window to give me a “wanker” sign. So perhaps not the wonderful solution it first appears. Although I didn’t get close-passed
If only some brilliant
If only some brilliant engineer could somehow link this with another ground-breaking recent technology:
http://www.trotify.com/
… it could be mounted at the front and cyclists would be able to hugely improve everyone’s safety by being their own red-flag people.
I’m thinking about an
I’m thinking about an invention that could project a hollographic image of a car around me
I was thinking about this but
I was thinking about something like this but then realised when it comes to road safety no-one can see the brontosaurus in the room.
“one-in-three told the BBC’s
“one-in-three told the BBC’s Panorama that cyclists shouldn’t be on the road”
Which is weird because according to my, yet to be published, research*; 1 in 3 drivers fall below an acceptable level of driving standard and shouldn’t be on the road either. Surely not a coincidence.
* by research I just mean numbers that I pulled out of my arse, using a very similar process to the BBC survey.
IanMK wrote:
I think your arse should produce a higher figure. 80% of drivers speed in 20 mph zones – which is (or at least ought to be) an unacceptable level of driving standard.
80% of drivers speed in 20mph
80% of drivers speed in 20mph zones, but 70% speed in 30mph zones.
It comes down to, “would you rather be hit by a speeding driver at 25mph or 35mph?”
The 70% data is from the SID in my local village.
All in All 20mph zones must be better for vulnerable road users.
Road.cc should start
Road.cc should start publishishing it’s own surveys for use in such programs.
98% of responders want segregated cycle lanes
100% of responders want a Rob Liddle’s mouth sown up
Shake wrote:
2% of responders wanted dedicated squirrel bridges for crossing busy roads
hawkinspeter wrote:
If the squirrels would actually use them I think you’ll find much higher approval for that proposal. I have to brake for errant squirrels far more often than I do for drivers.
What the heck are they doing in the middle of the road anyway? Looking for a particularly nice piece of gravel?
Are you sure that they weren
Are you sure that they weren’t after guinea pig bridges?
The rat-running won’t be
The rat-running won’t be fixed by more rodent roads, you know. They’ll just fill up – with increasingly big critters – until they reach capabara-city.
chrisonatrike wrote:
More lanes!
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/gallery/2015/jul/16/urban-wildlife-crossings-highways-bridges-in-pictures
IanMK wrote:
1-in-3 shouldn’t be on the road? More like 3-in-4 IME. That’s the proportion of cars I see which I reckon would fail any advanced motoring test – not on subjective criteria such as driving skills, but objective failings such as exceeding the speed limit, driving too close to the car in front (true of perhaps 85% of vehicles using motorways), using a hand-held mobile phone, failing to stop at amber lights, driving without both hands on the wheel, etc.
Check out online decriptions of the IAM test & its like, & then watch your fellow road users next time you’re heading up the M1 to visit Gran.
Rakia wrote:
FUCK OFF!
With your gross over-simplification, “are you a cyclist or a cycle nazi”? It isn’t one or the other for most people. Unless you’re the typical anti-cycling driving non-thinker.
Are you a troll or a fucking troll?
“Balanced discussion about people taking responsibility for their actions on the road” – false equivalency? Drivers kill or seriously injure 67 people a day on our roads, lets start the discussion with that. What do you think happens when a cyclist and bike hit an object? Said system weighs less than a hundred kilos, and is lucky to average 20 mph. It’s the cyclist that hets hurt most, in most situations. However, when a driver and car hit an object, it isn’t usually that driver that gets hurt, sat in their 2 tonne plus killing machine, at anything up to 100 mph.
Let’s talk about sentencing for those caught breaking the rules of the road. Cyclists get heavier sentences, and absolutely slaughtered in the media. Drivers rarely get any sentence, or a joke one if they do, and very little media coverage.
Shame on you for adding to the divisive part of the debate. Now fuck off!
And when you get there fuck
And when you get there fuck off again.
What thread was this in?
What thread was this in?
If I remember correctly, his “sensible comments” were that it was unreasonable for a cyclist to be upset if a HGV pulls off the road, over the pavement, into a cycle lane, across his path, forcing him to take evasive action (all without looking) because “hazards are a fact of life” and in his country “even children” are taught to respect delivery drivers because they need to make thier deliveries (and apparently they can, and should break any and all road laws in order to do so).
When I pointed out that his “sensible comments” were some of the stupidist shit ever written down and asked him to provide road fatality stats for his country to see how “sensible” their “sensible way of doing things” actually are, he mysteriously vanished.
But then again, he’s quite obviously a trolling bellend with no idea what he’s talking about. Even a child knows this.
BalladOfStruth wrote:
Was that also the same post that insulted all Londoners as being rude or the one that referred to all Germans as holding clipboards?
Yes and I used your reply as
Yes and I used your reply as a quote to them in another thread
They are just another troll and possibly a PBU.
hawkinspeter wrote:
The “people in Germany holding clipboards” comment was the one I responded to – the rude Londoners was the story about kids wheely-ing in the bike lane.
I took the clipboard comment to be a dig at Health and Safety culture, which is something that really winds me up – as someone who had one Grandad die young from asbestosis from working unprotected with asbestos all his working life, and the other Grandad is essentially immobile due to injuries from no proper lifting-and-handelling, I can say that, objectively, anyone who wants to go back to the “good old days” of people being maimed at work every day, is a fucking moron.
Just look at his comment above, he says cyclists should be “taking responsibility for your own actions, like a grown up person”, but says a cyclist who takes the lane to protect themselves from close-passes is a “nazi”. How fucking stupid can you get?
I listened to that segment.
I listened to that segment. Martin sounds posh doesn’t he.
Anyway the supposed cyclist gives himself away a few times.
1: “Sometimes drivers drive too close, that is what happens”. Yes having a 2 ton piece of metal going passed at 40mph less then three inches from me should just be accepted and not made a fuss of.
2: “Cycle nazis drive in the middle of the road on their bike”. Oops, seems this regular cyclist thinks it is all driving.
3: “making sure that the traffic has to slow down or do an outrageous manouvre to go around them, because that is what the Highway Code says they are entitled to do.”
Is he really complaining that somebody on the road is following the Highway Code? I suppose it is a rare occurence from Motorists that they hate people that do. And outrageous manouvre is keeping 1.5 metres away, really outrageous.
Haven’t watched the Panorama
Haven’t watched the Panorama thing yet so I’ll refrain from judging it just yet – sounds like it’s maybe a step or two up from the Channel 5 one from a year or three ago, maybe. At least that one only reached a few dozen people though 🙂
Don’t forget that Rod Liddle
Don’t forget that Rod Liddle said he couldn’t be a teacher as he’d want to fuck the kids.
He is also an admitted spouse
He is also an admitted spouse assaulter who likes to hit women when they are 20 weeks pregnant.
Edit oops.
20 months pregnant? Did he
20 months pregnant? Did he marry an elephant??
I doubt it, she’d not forget
I doubt it, she’d not forget that.
She was in the room though
She was in the room though
(No subject)
Didn’t he leave his wife
Didn’t he leave his wife while on their Hineymoon, after being with her for ten years and two children, to shack up with a 22 year old receptionist at the spectator. Why anyone listens to a word this idiot says beats me
Well, the Panorama thing was
Well, the Panorama thing was nowhere near as bad as I thought it was going to be, but as others have pointed out, it still had significant flaws. For instance pretending that Rod Liddle was in any way an authoritative source, or that their on-line survey was the least bit valid. Neither did they compare the amounts spent on cycling with the amounts spent on other transport infrastructure to put it into context, or mention the police data which shows that it is overwhelmingly the driver at fault in cyclist/motor vehicle collisions.
So while it could have been much, much worse, it could have been so much better. Still, at least it’s an improvement from the BBC’s normal line for the past forty years of “two wheels bad, four wheels good” approach. Maybe they’ll even actually commission a series about cycling and why it is so good for you, your neighbourhood and the planet.*
*Just a little joke I thought I’d throw in for my own amusement.
I’ve watched the Panorama now
I’ve watched the Panorama now -not too bad, but ‘Uncle Tom-ish’. It did expose what classic dimwits the greengrocer woman in Leicester, the London ‘abolish all cycle lanes’ drivers and the professional anti-cycling (surely he must work for the Mail as well as the Times?) journo are. It failed to identify the cyclist – phobic police as the single greatest obstacle to safer roads for cyclists. At last I know what Cycling Mikey looks like!
Not sure why they gave so
Not sure why they gave so much air time to that ignorant cyclist hater but ‘balance’ I guess.
Even the drivers they interviewed had little knowledge or understaing ‘ 5 abreast cyclists, 10 (?) deep’
The delivery driver commenting on cyclists. He should be in the bus lane.
Well, for a start there were 2 buses parked in the bus lane so there was no space to use the lane. Then this was jsut by a junction, so the cyclist need to be in L2 to see the traffic at the junction and to be seen by the traffic at the junction.
Shame Inspector Kev was not in it, although we did get one of his clips!
Let’s take a drive with the
Let’s take a drive with the fruit and veg van driver…
https://www.check-mot.service.gov.uk/results?registration=Mx13+xxs
Bald tyres for a start!
Let’s take a drive with the
Let’s take a drive with the fruit and veg van driver…
That’s nowt for Lancashire!
I was a bit disappointed she
I was a bit disappointed she wasn’t asked if a cargo bike might be a suitable alternative for the local deliveries.
Well, just watched it.
Well, just watched it. Thought it wasn’t too bad a stab at showing the dangers cyclists face & giving some balance (though the cabbie with no hint of irony, blaming the old cycle lane in Kensington for causing traffic, whilst sat in traffic after the cycle lane had been removed, was priceless, ) though similar thoughts to various below about certain sections & contributors. I’m not sure it’ll change anyone’s views either sadly – the polarisation is already too deep – but if it makes even a few people think twice about their behaviour on the bike or behind the wheel, then chalk it up as a win.
Case in point though – that mini roundabout in the Midlands where the cyclist got hit by the car/driver combo that cut it completely and didn’t “see” (ie look for) him – there’s already a FB “regular” blaming the cyclist for being the wrong side of the roundabout. I mean it’s not like he was taking evasive action to save his life or anything……
Soshul meeja clearly isn’t the best barometer, but that any sane human being can buy into that sort of crap is terrifying
on the mini roundabout thing,
on the mini roundabout thing, the problem is they just showed the video, without much explanation of how the cyclists positioning was totally valid and the car driver was completely in the wrong and that regardless of how spectacular this instance looks on video, thats actually a critical part of how alot of these crashes occur, and that the way the road is setup there played a big part in how drivers literally cutting corners to save time puts cyclists at risk on the road..
but it was treated as an isolated case, with no linkage to anything else and no follow up, so its sole purpose was it looked a spectacular crash.
I didn’t watch it. Someone
I didn’t watch it. Someone told me about it but I gave it a miss. I’ve read the reviews above and below. I was discussing this with a colleague – perhaps someone knows. Would these kind of programmes and ‘newspaper’ articles – essentially calling out people who cycle, be regular features in the media environment of any other country?