Highway Code changes: “Cycling in the UK is doomed,” says pro; Road safety and the media: are Highway Code news articles designed to inform or anger readers?; Wave or no wave; Road racing is back; Roche for 007? + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
“Cycling in the UK is doomed” – Groupama-FDJ rider Jake Stewart responds to critics of Highway Code changes
All you need to do is read the comments to see why cycling in the UK is doomed. Daily I have to make the decision to put my life in the hands of people like this…just to do my job. Too many have to make that decision to ride their bike for fun/get around. Society is broken.🤫 https://t.co/hx2cndyY4H
— Jake (@jakey_stewart) January 23, 2022
Revisions to the Highway Code, aimed at protecting the most vulnerable road users, finally come into force this week.
However, as we reported yesterday, the mainstream media’s coverage of the new rules has, shall we say, lacked a certain degree of accuracy.
> Highway Code changes: ‘What about cyclists, or do the rules not apply to them?’
For example, Mail Online – that bastion of fair and impartial reporting, especially when it comes to cyclists – told its readers that one new rule “tells cyclists to pedal in the middle of the road”, when in fact it simply provides advice about road positioning in certain situations such as on quiet roads, in slow-moving traffic, or when approaching a junction.
The misrepresentation of that particular change to the Highway Code prompted the following tweet from a political polling account:
Cyclists will be told to ride in the centre of the lane to make themselves more visible to motorists under far-reaching changes to the rules of the road intended to improve safety and “unleash our nation of cyclists”. Do you support or oppose this new rule? #Politics
— Politics Polls (@PoliticsPollss) January 23, 2022
While over 55% of the nearly 5,000 respondents supported the changes, some of the replies were depressingly familiar:
Ridiculous and they don’t pay road tax
— Moonflower (@jobottomley) January 23, 2022
How about they obey traffic laws and display a licence & insurance plate.
(*new* cyclist and driver)— 🇬🇧saracen🏴 (@infidelsaracen) January 23, 2022
It’s quite simple Martin, you wait.
A competent driver would have waited anyway, as a 1.5 meter (minimum) passing gap would always need the overtaking vehicle to cross into the next lane/other side of road.
— Roads Policing Unit (RPU) – Surrey Police – UK (@SurreyRoadCops) January 23, 2022
For Groupama-FDJ pro Jake Stewart, these responses summed up “why cycling in the UK is doomed.”
The Coventry-born rider, who finished second in Omloop Het Nieuwsblad during his first full professional season last year, tweeted: “Daily I have to make the decision to put my life in the hands of people like this…just to do my job. Too many have to make that decision to ride their bike for fun/get around. Society is broken.”
With “cyclists” currently trending on Twitter – take a look if want your blood pressure to rise uncontrollably – it’s hard to argue with Jake.
To wave or not to wave?
Always amuses me (actually it doesn’t) that a certain National squad blanks other riders and never bothers to wave or acknowledge other bike riders but world champions and WT riders will give a friendly wave or “Allez”… do better ffs. You’ll need people like me soon enough.
— Col Sturgess (@ColinASturgess) January 23, 2022
This tweet, posted last night by former individual pursuit world champion and current Ribble Weldtite DS Colin Sturgess, raised that age-old question of cycling etiquette: should all cyclists wave at each other when they pass?
Some of the replies to Colin’s tweet seemed to suggest (and I’m paraphrasing here) that Britain’s moral decline as a nation over the last decade is intrinsically linked to fewer cyclists greeting each other on the roads.
Every cyclist always used to wave at every cyclist. When did this stop??? Don’t care who or how good you are a wave is simple… doesn’t have to be as enthusiastic as the one I gave @Cameron_Jeffers today but at least do something.
— Simon Deeley (@SimonDeeley) January 23, 2022
Now, full disclosure: I’m what’s known as an “overly enthusiastic waver” when out on the bike, and I feel a touch disgruntled if another cyclist blanks me (but I’m learning to live with it, okay?).
What do you think? Does waving to your fellow cyclist instil a sense of community, or is it just another old-fashioned and outdated tradition that belongs with only wearing white socks and making sure the arms of your sunglasses sit outside your helmet straps?
Road racing is back!
Awful pictures where you can see who’s where
Commentary in a language I don’t understand
Poor course design leading to horrible crashes
CYCLING IS BACK BABY!! https://t.co/yxS3ztZ9sM— Journal Velo (@JournalVelo) January 23, 2022
It’s been a long, cold winter and we’ve managed to survive on weekly doses of cyclo-cross and drawn-out teaser videos for new kits, but the moment we’ve all been waiting for has finally arrived – professional road racing has returned to Europe!
In yesterday’s Clàssica Comunitat Valenciana, the first European road race of the 2022 season, Eolo-Kometa’s Giovanni Lonardi won a chaotic, crash-marred sprint ahead of Amaury Capiot and Chris Lawless. Ah, it’s still only January but I can smell the cobbles and frites already…
Meanwhile back on the ‘cross field, Tom Pidcock continued his preparation for this weekend’s world championships, finishing third in an epic, hard-fought duel with Lars van der Haar, Michael Vanthourenhout and eventual winner Eli Iserbyt.
According to reports, Pidcock trained for three hours on Saturday morning before taking on the weekend’s racing double-header in Hamme and Hoogerheide. Sunday’s showdown in Fayetteville should be interesting…
“Luckily I can go to work by bike!”
175€ voor een volle tank …
Gelukkig kan ik met de fiets gaan werken! pic.twitter.com/FWya6wD1Yo— Iljo Keisse (@IljoKeisse) January 24, 2022
With diesel prices in Belgium soaring, Iljo Keisse has a simple solution.
This morning, the Quick-Step Alpha Vinyl veteran tweeted: “175€ for a full tank… Luckily I can go to work by bike!”
I wonder how much it would cost to fill up Keisse’s teammate, “El Tractor” Tim Declercq?
The name’s Roche, Nicolas Roche
Danced a Viennese waltz with @KarenDWTS last night ! Really enjoyed our dance. Still need lots of work, but nice to se improvement over the weeks. Happy to make to movie week! Thanks again for all the support 🙏@DWTSIRL @rtenews pic.twitter.com/kEAbPnKNUu
— nicholas roche (@nicholasroche) January 24, 2022
As many of you will remember, I’ve been avidly fallowing Nicolas Roche’s progress on the Irish version of Dancing with the Stars (so you don’t have to, although I’d highly recommend it).
Well last night the former Sky and BMC rider showed as much fight and spirit in the ballroom as he did on steep Spanish mountains during his career. His Viennese Waltz scored a much-improved 16 out of 30 from the judges which, combined with the viewer vote, was enough to secure his place in next Sunday’s show.
Whatever you think of his frame and foot placement, it must be said that Roche looked impossibly cool in a double-breasted suit, prompting Bora-Hansgrohe’s Irish champion Ryan Mullen to throw the retired pro’s hat in the ring for a certain upcoming vacancy in the spy world:
You genuinely should be the next James Bond #Nicofor007
— Ryan Mullen (@ryanmullen9) January 23, 2022
Mullen could be on to something here. Surely the time is right for a cycling James Bond? Ditch the car chases and give him a Colnago, it would be perfect.
I can see it now – Nicolas Roche stars as 007 in “No Time to Ride”, “The Man with the Golden Crank”, “On Sir Brailsford’s Secret Service”, “From the Vuelta With Love”, “The Worlds is Not Enough”…
Now what’s the phone number for Eon Productions?
Radio, Radio
The debate over the upcoming changes to the Highway Code looks set to rumble on throughout the week, this morning graduating from Twitter to the always nuanced and insightful world of radio and television.
The BBC has earned some plaudits for its balanced handling of this rather touchy subject:
Thank you to @NickyAACampbell on @bbc5live for delivering a careful, thoughtful and balanced phone-in about cyclists and the Highway Code. A rare, rare thing in Radioland when this subject is aired.
— Ned Boulting (@nedboulting) January 24, 2022
Meanwhile, on LBC…
They claimed:
• Highway Code re-write was hijacked by cycling orgs in cyclists’ favour.
• Rules eg about primary position and not having to use cycle lanes are new (they’re not)
• Code should have mandatory bike helmet rule.Inflammatory stuff.
— Peter Walker (@peterwalker99) January 24, 2022
In the written press, Peter Walker’s article in the Graun dispelling the common myths around the new changes also serves as a perfect antidote to the “reports” found in the Mail and Times over the weekend.
Highway Code changes: an open letter to journalists
As we’ve seen already over the weekend and this morning, the upcoming changes to the Highway Code have shone an important light on how the press reports on aspects of road safety and how the relationship between different road users is portrayed in the media.
Last night cycling blogger Sarah Berry penned an open letter to journalists, calling on them to use their power responsibly when informing readers about the revisions to the Highway code and road safety in general.
In the letter, which can be viewed in full on Patreon, Sarah writes:
The time when I would feel safer on the roads was just days away and now the media was doing its part in making sure everyone knew about [the changes] and understood them. And then I read the headlines.
“New Highway Code rule will find drivers £1,000 for opening door with wrong hand”.
“Highway Code overhaul that tells cyclists to pedal in the middle of the road”.
Instead of seeing this for what it was; updated guidance on how to save lives and keep people safe on the roads, media giants were purposefully misrepresenting the Highway Code changes in ways designed to most outrage drivers. These articles weren’t designed to inform, they were designed to anger — and now I’m terrified they’re going to do just that.
So that’s why I’m writing this open letter right now, to you, to the journalists across the country trying to spice up what they see is a boring and obligatory story about road rule changes coming this weekend.
Because it’s not boring to me. The last thing I need is angrier drivers on the road, because the ones out there right now are already so pissed off about my presence that they do things that make me fear for my life almost every time I go out for a ride. Whether it’s the van that passes too fast and too close, or the taxi speeding just inches behind my back wheel, or the woman who isn’t watching where she’s going and hurls abuse at me through her window for almost ruining her life by making her a murderer. There is too much anger out there already, I can’t handle any more.
And before you ask me why I ride a bike in the first place if it makes me feel so unsafe, stop and ask yourself if you’d ask yourself the same kind of question to a woman afraid of walking home alone at night.
I want to feel excited and hopeful about the changes to the Highway Code again. But if you keep doing what you’re doing, the roads will become more dangerous for people like me this weekend. You have so much power in your hands, please use it responsibly.
MVDP “just sitting at home on the couch”
Remember Zwift’s slogan about emulating Mathieu van der Poel? Well for once, that goal seems a lot more achievable at the moment.
The Dutch superstar is currently recovering from a back injury – reportedly sustained from switching between road and mountain biking last year – and has been told to rest by doctors, putting his spring classics campaign in jeopardy.
His father and fellow Tour of Flanders winner Adri van der Poel told VTM Nieuws yesterday: “He’s doing okay. He can ride again when he is pain free, but right now he’s just sitting at home on the couch.”
Same, Mathieu, same…
New cycling infrastructure on its way
While we all have our heads turned by Mr Loophole and Mike ‘grow your own concrete’ Graham spouting on about how the Highway Code changes will wreak havoc on our roads, there have been plenty of positive developments this month in the world of cycling infrastructure.
Last week, City of York Council approved a £1.4 million plan to improve cycling, walking and bus use on the busy Tadcaster Road. The project includes introducing some “light” segregation to the cycle path and widening the footpath and bike path at one section of the road.
In Exeter, a temporary no-entry zone which helped form a pop-up cycle route has been made permanent. A section of Dryden Road was made available for cyclists only in 2020 as part of the council’s bid to provide safer routes for pedestrians and cyclists in the early stages of the pandemic. Together with similar measures on three other roads – all of which have since been made permanent – the no-entry zone created a two-and-a-half mile cross-city cycle route in Exeter.
Councillors in Slough have also improved the permanent installation of a bus and cycle lane along the A4, again introduced as a temporary measure during the pandemic. A decision is also due soon on the creation of a £10 million cycle ‘superhighway’ alongside the A4, which the council hopes will improve cycle safety, ease off traffic on the busy road, decrease air pollution, and encourage more residents to take up cycling.
Bike Deliveries: "Saving money, stress and planet!"
Our amazing cyclists made 506 deliveries last year, to save borrowers having to get in their cars do battle with Bath traffic! We can drop items on your doorstep for £2 (where could you park for that?!) saving ££, stress and planet! That’s what we call a win-win! pic.twitter.com/P4SRlv8Ksk
— Share and Repair Bath (@ShareRepairBath) January 24, 2022
A win-win indeed. Not sure about the headwear though…
Road safety and the media: your reaction
Today’s discussion of the new Highway Code changes has certainly fired up a lively debate in the comments and in our inbox, tangential chats about leg shaving aside (that’s for another day…).
While this is a debate that will certainly rumble on, here is a selection of some of your thoughts so far:
Those that oppose the changes to the Highway Code now: what exactly were they doing when the consultation was going on? If somebody is suggesting that Cycling UK have hijacked the agenda, how did they let that happen? They must have been fast asleep. I haven’t heard anybody say, “I opposed these changes at the consultation stage”. If you didn’t oppose it at the correct stage, then jog on.
The Surrey police comment nails it, as always. A safe overtake will generally mean crossing the centre line. Which is why it is irrelevant if cyclists are in a row, two abreast or riding in the middle of the road. If you can’t see clearly to overtake then don’t do it. The only person putting anyone in danger is the driver who decides to overtake when they can’t see that the way ahead is clear. I don’t know why people find this complicated.
I have been having a look at the new Highway Code rules themselves rather than just reading the press. A lot of the changes seem to be common sense, revolving around being aware of other road users. They do, however, seem to be ‘urban centric’ and have not really been thought out with respect to country lanes.
I live on the Kent No. 1 cycle route, and as such we get a fair number of cyclists, particularly at weekends. The lanes where I am are single track with passing places. No footpaths and plenty of potholes. There are typically high hedges on both sides of the road, and lots of tight, blind bends. Most of the time it is impossible to overtake cyclists safely because the road is simply not wide enough unless they stop at one of the passing places, as we do in cars. Cycling at any speed down the middle of these lanes, particularly approaching bends, is potentially suicidal, since just out of sight could be a tractor, a delivery truck taking up the whole road, horses, or indeed other cyclists. Nonetheless, we often see, and quite often barely miss, cyclists two or three abreast doing just that.
I’m naturally risk averse. When I first started cycling, whenever I came in to conflict with other road users I would check the highway code along with other advice (e.g. Bikeability). The conclusion was always the same: I can’t change what other road users do, I can only affect my own behaviour. Largely, that meant staying away from shared use paths and, importantly, taking greater control of the lane – riding in primary (especially when the highway code recommends that drivers don’t overtake) and moving in to position early when approaching junctions. If this pisses some drivers off they only have their own behaviour to blame.
With the changes to the Highway Code that comes into effect next week, I believe too much responsibility is placed on the motorist. Cyclists and pedestrians don’t have to abide by the highway code or even understand it. Let’s level up to playing field a bit, get all road users – this includes cyclist – to take a test so that they understand when they are breaking the law. For instance,a motorist can only overtake a cyclist if there is about 2 metres clearance, but a cyclist can undertake close enough to knock your wing mirror.
Come on let’s have a level playing field where we are all responsible, and if you are going to fine the motorist, fine cyclists and pedestrians alike.
This is health and safety gone mad. I’d like to see the results of the Risk Assessments carried out on these new rules.
Jake Stewart is wrong, and cycling in the UK is moving in the right direction; slowly, almost imperceptibly, but things are changing, which is why the old guard petrol heads feel threatened.
We have to keep the pressure up by challenging politicians to actually implement those nice shiny policies they’ve approved, not just leave them gathering dust on the shelves. If you don’t already do it, get in touch with your local campaign group to find out how you can help and email your councillors and MP demanding resources for cycling.
I disagree, cycling in the UK is not moving in the right direction, in my experience anyway. Close passes are now so frequent I am gradually finding quieter and quieter roads for my road bike, or riding my mtb off road more and more. When my buddies go out at the weekend, if they choose Saturday instead of Sunday, I’ll decline. If they choose Saturday PM instead of AM, I’ll decline. None of them commute though, so none of them ride at the “worst” time of the day. And this is rural Sussex, not central London or any other big city.
But how many times does a news article about cycling descend into a slanging match about road tax and red lights? Why do ALL drivers seem to think it is they alone who pay for roads?
It’s good that Jake Stewart is speaking up.
The same people who abuse us and put us in danger when we ride bikes very likely cheer on British racing cyclists. So if the British riders speak up, they can make a difference.
I take an optimistic view and all this publicity will at least make drivers more likely to think about cyclists.
Oh, and turns out waving is still a fundamental part of cycling culture. Just not in cities, and especially not in Oxford…
24 January 2022, 09:50
On the subject of talk radio...
Expect carnage and more danger...Mr Loophole rants about Highway Code changes to talkRadio's Mike Graham
Nick Freeman, the lawyer notorious for obtaining not guilty verdicts for celebrities charged with motoring offences, slammed the changes as "ill-conceived"
24 January 2022, 09:50
Bernal's crash comes less than a week after the Ineos leader was filmed narrowly avoiding an overtaking car while training on home roads.
Egan Bernal in intensive care following successful surgery on training crash injuries
The reigning Giro d'Italia champion's Tour de France return looks in doubt after suffering a fractured vertebrae, fractured right femur, fractured right patella, chest trauma, a punctured lung and several fractured ribs in the collision with a parked bus
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.
92 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@chrisonabike - I agree, but my point was more about the reluctance/pushback involved, rather than the effectiveness/safety of any schemes that are/might be rolled out
Trams would be great! Wonder what happened to them...
Serious injuries as defined in statistics span from an uncomplicated fracture of a forearm bone to catastrophic multiple injuries that result in death in subsequent weeks and months. Consequently without further analysis they may be quite misleading, it may be that the statistics disguise what would otherwise have been fatal injuries at the roadside due to effective early treatment by first responders and subsequent trauma care OR that they reflect an increase in injuries at the lower edge of the severity spectrum OR neither. From the numbers alone we do not know and so are not in a good position to draw inferences about the seeming fall in deaths and rise in reported serious injuries.
@chrisonabike The intense resistance Network Rail seem to put up against absolutely any infrastructure project near the railways that would lead to more passengers on the railways is perpetually baffling to me.
@jackcycles Sorry Vincent, but your legacy will be to be remembered as a grumpy failure and pub bore, who twists facts to suit narratives and has never knowingly been correct about anything in his miserable life.
@mdavidford Surely we have been Norman since 1066?
@mdavidford Surely we have been Norman since 1066?
@belugabob true, but doing that and persuading most parents to drive their children to school entailed a hefty sacrifice of children - and not a few parents. (Luckily that was "back then" and we probably wouldn't tolerate it now... OTOH while "fixing things" should have much smaller casualty numbers, "during the transition" it could well increase...)
Well, accommodating the motor vehicle required "transformation of streets", so we've proved that it's possible...🙄
Yet another case of planning agreements made but never fulfilled, nor checked by the LA. Developers can do what they want, it seems
92 thoughts on “Highway Code changes: “Cycling in the UK is doomed,” says pro; Road safety and the media: are Highway Code news articles designed to inform or anger readers?; Wave or no wave; Road racing is back; Roche for 007? + more on the live blog”
It’s good that Jake Stewart
It’s good that Jake Stewart is speaking up.
The same people who abuse us and put us in danger when we ride bikes very likely cheer on British racing cyclists. So if the British riders speak up, they can make a difference.
I suspect the same people who
I suspect the same people who abuse us on the road only cheer on TeamGB cyclists who go round in circles in a velodrome, and that’s where most of them would like us riding instead of being in their way on the roads and they wouldnt have a clue who Jake Stewart was unless he was the new centre forward signing for Man Utd or Chelsea.
Unfortunately I fear you give
Unfortunately I fear you give them too much credit for a logical train of thought, and linking “sport” (a thing what happens on the telly and should be cheered as long as there is a Union Flag or cross of St George on display) with hobbies and pass times that involve more activity than driving to the pub to watch aforementioned “sport”.
Quote:
But that is precisely what the new rules do say. The Daily Mail even furnished the article with a graphic directly below the headline giving the precise detail on the rule, and printed the full rule out verbatim (Rule 72).
I don’t think the Daily Mail is always accurate, but in this case it’s hard to fathom what more they could have done to be even-handed.
No it doesn’t.
No it doesn’t.
New Rule 72 Road positioning. When riding on the roads, there are two basic road positions you should adopt, depending on the situation.
1. Ride in the centre of your lane, to make yourself as clearly visible as possible, in the following situations:
• on quiet roads or streets – if a faster vehicle comes up behind you, move to the left to enable them to overtake, if you can do so safely
• in slower-moving traffic – when the traffic around you starts to flow more freely, move over to the left if you can do so safely so that faster vehicles behind you can overtake
• at the approach to junctions or road narrowings where it would be unsafe for drivers to overtake you
2. When riding on busy roads, with vehicles moving faster than you, allow them to overtake where it is safe to do so whilst keeping at least 0.5 metres away, and further where it is safer, from the kerb edge. Remember that traffic on most dual carriageways moves quickly. Take extra care crossing slip roads.
The issue for me with the above is that many motorists will interpret the rule as ‘I’m faster than you so you have to move over to the left” and will decide themselves what is safe. So pretty much what happens now.
The middle of the road /
The middle of the road / centre of the lane are just different ways of expressing the same thing. “You were in the middle of the road” in common English means “you were in the centre of the lane”.
The Daily Mail made this clear in the graphic underneath their headline – check out the original article if you don’t believe me.
I’m also very concerned about the way that lawless idiots who cycle on pavements – the kind of people who are defended on these very pages – have forced the law to state that no cyclist shall be allowed to use the footpath to ride a bike. How are children going to learn how to ride if they cannot use the pavement? These are the exact people we need to encourage to actively ride daily.
You wrote – “But that is
You wrote – “But that is precisely what the new rules do say” – it precisely isn’t.
How things are expressed is open to interpretation. Preciseness isn’t. My interpretation of middle of the lane is very different to middle of the road.
sjplake wrote:
Amen. “You’re in the middle of the bloody road!” “No, I’m in the middle of the lane.”
sjplake wrote:
— sjplake[pedant on] Precision [pedant off]
eburtthebike wrote:
“Preciseness” is a perfectly cromulent word though I’d agree that precision is probably a better choice. Are you that Grammarly that I keep seeing youtube ads for?
https://www.bikeability.org
https://www.bikeability.org.uk/
https://www.cycling.scot/bikeability-scotland
But wait – all that training but we don’t provide somewhere convenient which feels safe for these young people to ride? Maybe that’s why they don’t keep riding!
How it could be – and hopefully how it will soon start looking more like in places in the UK who understand the benefits they stand to gain e.g. parts of Manchester:
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/tag/children/
They do training over there too of course!
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2014/03/11/new-traffic-test-app-for-dutch-children/
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/bicycle-training-in-the-netherlands/
Why should we bother?
http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/search/label/campaigning%20for%20children
https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2011/10/31/streets-safe-for-children/
Or, you could – oh, I dunno –
Or, you could – oh, I dunno – engage brain, consider the points being made, and respond intelligently.
As an alternative to behaving like a seven year old.
(Maybe you are a seven year old).
Flintshire Boy wrote:
Leave this particular persona
Leave this particular persona to Rendel maybe?
chrisonatrike wrote:
Sorry Chris, I was forgetting myself….
chrisonatrike wrote:
Job’s a gooden.
You replied to the wrong
You replied to the wrong poster in error.
.
.
Flintshire Boy wrote:
Why should we engage with someone like your friend Nigel? When he regularly posts completely contradictory statements.
I mean did you actually read his diatribes over the weekend….. berating a cyclist for riding in the road at 20mph in a 20mph speed limit for not cycling on the pavement because “I’d (Garage at Large) argue that by riding in the manner displayed in the video, the cyclist hasn’t displayed values of respect and decency.” and “he has deliberately held up the firwoods driver.”
Yet somehow today its “I’m also very concerned about the way that lawless idiots who cycle on pavements”
So which is it to be? Should cyclists who are travelling at the speed limit be automatically deemed to not show respect to other road users or should they be lawless idiots who cycle at 20mph on the pavement?
Now Nigeywigey will try and say his comments over the weekend were in reference to a cycle lane that the cyclist wasn’t using. However, he continued to berate the cyclist even though multiple people pointed out that the cycle infrastructure he was alleging that the cyclist wasn’t using didn’t actually start until after the point in which the Firwoods driver had passed the cyclist.
So I agree with Simon that your buddy Nige is nothing but a troll
When a valid point is made I
When a valid point is made I respond in kind. In this case where someone insists a hue that reflects no photons actually reflects all photons I shall also respond in kind.
Have a nice day.
I’m just waiting for some
I’m just waiting for some misogynistic racist toe rag who pretends that they’ve ever been on a bike at all since the age of 7 to deliberately conflate a lane and a road in a vain and obtuse effort to pretend that another bunch of lying toerags somehow for once might be telling the truth.
Oh….
I take an optimistic view and
I take an optimistic view and all this publicity will at least make drivers more likely to think about cyclists.
Jake Stewart is wrong, and
Jake Stewart is wrong, and cycling in the UK is moving in the right direction; slowly, almost imperceptibly, but things are changing, which is why the old guard petrol heads feel threatened.
We have to keep the pressure up by challenging politicians to actually implement those nice shiny policies they’ve approved, not just leave them gathering dust on the shelves. If you don’t already do it, get in touch with your local campaign group to find out how you can help and email your councillors and MP demanding resources for cycling.
eburtthebike wrote:
I disagree, cycling in the UK is not moving in the right direction, in my experience anyway. Close passes are now so frequent I am gradually finding quieter and quieter roads for my road bike, or riding my mtb off road more and more. When my buddies go out at the weekend, if they choose Saturday instead of Sunday, I’ll decline. If they choose Saturday PM instead of AM, I’ll decline. None of them commute though, so none of them ride at the “worst” time of the day. And this is rural Sussex, not central London or any other big city.
To me, close passing is the single biggest issue cyclists face. There is NO excuse for anybody to close pass anyone else – it even pisses me off when another cyclist does it to me! – and it makes me more and more intolerant to it.
The amount of traffic has doubled in the last 30 years. Cars themselves (and I guess vans and minibuses) are getting bigger and bigger – the average car in 2020 weighed 1900kg!
But how many times does a news article about cycling descend into a slanging match about road tax and red lights? Why do ALL drivers seem to think it is them alone that pays for roads?
Got to agree with this.
Got to agree with this. Plenty of words (announcements about things like active travel). Not a lot of action. Close passes are numerous on any ride in Surrey and to that you can add tailgating in an intimidatory way and simply squeezing past to deliberately push towards the gutter. The problem is there is little consequence for actions. Surrey Police are as bad as the rest despite this website’s fixation with their ‘road cops’ Twitter feed.
55% support of the new HC
55% support of the new HC changes – despite all the lies and misinformation spread by the usual suspects.
People, THIS IS A MASSIVE FUCKING WIN!!!
Thank god for Peter Walker.
Thank god for Peter Walker.
Just read this – anyone
Just read this – anyone tempted to respond to tedious whataboutery needs only point to this article – it’s got it covered!
What is so flippin’ hard for
What is so flippin’ hard for someone to understand that a lane on a road is for a vehicle (not Motor Vehicle). Be it a tractor, car, lorry, bus, motorbite, horse or cyclist.
No one expect a motor cyclist to sit in the gutter. Everyone would give room to overtake a Moped doing 30 in a 60 so why is a bicycle any different.
I twice got close passed this weekend because I sat in the gutter and cars overtook me into oncoming traffic. But that is the norm now, so what more do I expect.
Something else that has irked me this weekend.
“Cyclists should stop when cars want to overtake”. So therefore should any vehicle not capable of keeping up with traffic which effectively means if you don’t sit at the speed limit you are in the way and so get our of the way.
I’m naturally risk averse.
I’m naturally risk averse. When I first started cycling, whenever I came in to conflict with other road users I would check the highway code along with other advice (eg bikeability). The conclusion always was the same, I can’t change what other road users do I can only effect my own behaviour. Largely, that meant staying away from shared use paths and, importantly, taking greater control of the lane – riding in primary (especially when the highway code recommends that drivers don’t overtake) and moving in to position early when approaching junctions. If this pisses some drivers off they only have their own behaviour to blame.
You’ve done the right thing
You’ve done the right thing (and something I also do) in checking the Highway Code. The issue is most drivers haven’t looked at it since learning……and are plain ignorant – and have no interest in educating themselves.
DoomeFrog wrote:
I’ve never had a car pull over to let me pass out of many thousands that have queued in traffic in front of me over the years on narrow roads where I’m unable to filter on the inside and it’s unsafe to filter on the outside – not one of those drivers even considered it.
EddyBerckx wrote:
Meanwhile, I’ve noticed quite a few cars pulling to one side slightly when I’ve been filtering between two lanes of stationary traffic to give me more room – considerate motorists do exist.
I get this sometimes too, it
I get this sometimes too, it’s nice and shows awareness in the driver, and a smaller number who deliberately edge into my path, I suppose at least they are using their mirrors and not staring at their phones, I just nip down the other side where they have of course made more room.
So the Mail is criticised for
So the Mail is criticised for telling its readers that a new rule tells cyclists to pedal in the middle of the road.
But The Times gets a free pass for telling its readers the exact same thing because… ?
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/cyclists-pedal-to-middle-of-the-road-under-new-highway-code-87khrjklc
Awavey wrote:
Other liars are available……
Awavey wrote:
I think mainly because of the pay wall.
But yes this highlights the problem. From the bit I can see:
Bikeability has always enouraged cyclists to take primary so we have already been told to ride in the middle of the lane, the new highway code is just telling other road users what we already knew.
1.5m is only clarification on what was previously intended.
We still aren’t required to use bike lanes and never have been. No change
Ditto on the pavement nonsense.
So abosolutely nothing to see here.
IanMK wrote:
Same goes for the Torygraph – I am unwilling to fund their production of misinformation and right wing bile just so that I can argue with them.
I’m a waver, except on the
I’m a waver, except on the commute.
I’m a waver. As a young teen
I’m a waver. As a young teen I started going on longer rides out of London into Kent. I was delighted when older riders giving me a cheery wave and hello, even when I wasn’t wearing all the gear and hadn’t yet started shaving my legs. It played a part in my joining a club and cycling becoming the most important sport of my lifetime.
lesterama wrote:
at the age of 47, I’m wondering when I should start doing this.
wycombewheeler wrote:
It’s generally considered a bit creepy to go around shaving young teens’ legs
hawkinspeter wrote:
Naughty… I’m almost certain that isn’t what Wyc meant.
Wyc?….
hawkinspeter wrote:
Is it ok to wax them? or only if I’m being paid for it?
wycombewheeler wrote:
Depends on how well you can pull it off
I’ve never been sure where to
I’ve never been sure where to start and stop, so I leave well alone. Anyway aerodynamic theory would suggest smooth rear side of legs will actually increase drag, what you is need a pair of “calf mohicans” down the trailing edge to encourage the air flow to detach.
SimoninSpalding wrote:
i read it wasn’t about friction, but only about dealing with the aftermath of crashes.
So I’ve decided not to crash, instead of shaving and crashing.
Wow – so far, on this thread,
Wow – so far, on this thread, we have waiving shaving and saving waving.
And a bit of raving.
And a bit of raving.
You missed a ?…
You missed a ?…
The former aerodynamicist in
The former aerodynamicist in me can’t resist a minor correction here. Detached airflow actually creates an area of low static pressure behind the body (or leg) which is pressure drag I.e. a bad thing. The confusion might arise from the different characteristics of laminar and turbulent boundary layers; in general, a laminar boundary layer produces less drag, but once past the thicker part of the body it has a greater tendency to seperate from the surface, leading to higher pressure drag. By “tripping” the airflow into a turbulent state (e.g. by the judicious application of “calf mohicans” at some point ahead of the trailing edge) the area of separated flow can be reduced, with a net overall reduction in drag.
Ok, I’ll get back in my box.
(EDIT) Forgot to mention, I’m a waver.
SimoninSpalding wrote:
Surely you start at the ankle and then stop somewhere above the shorts line. I know, I know, stop calling you Shirley
wycombewheeler wrote:
I turn 52 this Friday, and still haven’t started (though I do occasionally – and briefly – consider it)(.
Steve K wrote:
I lost all the hair on my legs a few years ago (I’ll be 51 in a few weeks).
I have never shaved them; but now, you’d think I do.
brooksby wrote:
If you’re bothered about it, you could start making small hats out of squirrel skins – then you’d be a little furrier
I’m a waver, except when I’m
I’m a waver, except when I’m a bit concerned I might fall off if I wave. In which case I will always give a cheeky little smile or “hello”.
Garage at Large wrote:
Yes, I was using ‘wave’ as a shorthand for wave, nod, or call out depending on circumstances 🙂
Problem solved
Problem solved
Garage at Large wrote:
For reasons I can’t adequately explain I hear this in Jonathan Ross‘s voice (“I’m a waver”), followed by him suggesting that “You can see that he’s mischievous, mysterious and devious” followed by “He glides into your mind with a sunny ‘Hello!'”
A nod, a lift of the hand,
A nod, a lift of the hand, eye contact, sad look when riding up hills, a grunt, a cheery “Hi” (avoids those awkward “what time is it?” moments around lunchtime) – all these are part of the tool box of acknowledging another human being (known as an effing cyclist to those in their tin boxes).
Country walkers can normally manage the same, though I do analyse those who studiously avoid eye contact for age and suspected social standing (what used to be called yuppies are the worst).
Small town pavement users are a tricky issue – our stroll away from the High Street usually gets good interactions, but once in the shops, interaction seems to be a no-no. It’s so complicated being British at times.
greetigns to all riders and
greetigns to all riders and most walkers when out in the countryside – impossible and not relevant in the city – as well as always thanking drivers when appropriate.
being nice should be the default position
In the countryside, a wave.
In the countryside, a wave.
In the city, a Mexican wave. For some reason, I’ve not yet had much luck getting others to join in though.
Always wave, mostly get a
Always wave, mostly get a response too, even from yoofs on their BMXs.
Course design certainly
Course design certainly seemed to be lacking in that Clàssica CV finish, with an island right on the exit of that first corner, but I’m struggling to see how it had much, if anything, to do with the crash – that just looked like people riding into each other in the melee.
In my experience cycling in
In my experience cycling in Oxford there’s very little waving, and I take this to be a good thing because it shows people don’t feel like they’re part of a minority outgroup that has to stick together against the world but are just normal people doing a normal thing.
Also, if you waved at every
Also, if you waved at every cyclist in Oxford, your hand would fall off.
Certainly true. I will say
Certainly true. I will say that on the occasions I’ve stopped to inspect something on the bike another cyclist has stopped to ask if I need help. Every time. So it’s not that people are insular.
stewcelliott wrote:
I think you are onto something. I used to nod and wave in the U.K. Then I moved to Germany and many people clearly thought it was bizarre.
While going up a mountain still counts though IMO.
cqexbesd wrote:
Important point!
First time over on the the overnight ferry to Hoek van Holland, we pedalled off through the mist towards breakfast. As we had while cycling through England we waved at people on bikes we passed. No response – except for some odd looks. Took at least an hour until we realised that this was the equivalent of waving at passing pedestrians while walking somewhere and made us look odder than we already did.
Or maybe it was just the squirrel suits.
Fantastic coverage of the
Fantastic coverage of the changes to the highway code on the Mike Graham show on Talk Radio this morning – Rod Liddle, Nick Freeman to name two guests already and some enlightened discussion on how to improve road safety. I’ve been busy working this morning so haven’t had chance to listen to the specifics but will report back later if I get a chance.
*Edit* turns out Rod Liddle was on to discuss vaccines and vaccine mandates, but Nick Freeman’s interview was fantastic. I bet Local Cycling Bureaucrat Chris Boardman’s ears are burning, that’s for sure.
Full report coming later.
You mean Mike Graham – the
You mean Mike Graham – the Talk Radio host who thinks that you can ‘grow’ concrete?
Nick Freeman whose career is keeping terrible drivers on the roads?
Rod Liddle – slightly less right-wing than Mussolini?
Nah, I’ll give it a swerve thanks all the same. If I want to listen to a bunch of middle-aged right-wing reactionaries I’ll just nip into the nearest boozer in town.
Rod “let’s garrotte cyclists,
Rod “let’s garrotte cyclists, including children” Liddle? Enlightened indeed.
Garage at Large wrote:
Lol – “Fantastic coverage today! I haven’t heard anything they said but they had some anti-cycling facists on so it must have been spot on!”
And you say you’re not a horrible little troll?
Garage at Large wrote:
So you don’t understand the specifics but still form strong opinions. I’m sure there’s a word for people like this…
So you don’t understand the specifics but still form strong opinions. I’m sure there’s a word for people like this…
[/quote]
Yes. It’s Cockwomble
“Surely the time is right for
“Surely the time is right for a cycling James Bond? Ditch the car chases and give him a Colnago, it would be perfect.”
I’m available, younger than Daniel Craig (just, but actually Roger Moore was older that Sean Connery) and can even provide my own (old) Colnago and DJ – although to date I have never tried to combine the two.
Assuming Nico Roche turns it down of course…
SimoninSpalding wrote:
Jackie already did it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZFr4uiR5x0
A rhetorical question, in
A rhetorical question, in response to the Peter Walker comment. Those that oppose the changes to the Highway Code now, what exactly were they doing when the consultation was going on? If somebody is suggesting that Cycling UK have hijacked the agenda how did they let that happen? They must have been fast asleep. I haven’t heard anybody say “I opposed these changes at the consultation stage”. If you didn’t oppose it at the correct stage then jog on.
Slightly random (and minor in
Slightly random (and minor in the grand scheme of things) question about the Highway Code:
One of the changes is to recommend the “Dutch Reach” when opening a car door. Am I the only one who think the Dutch Reach is not actually very good at spotting cyclists approaching, especially from the front seats of a car? I’ve tried it a few times, and it’s good for checking the area immediately outside the door, but I find it doesn’t give you a good view of the area further back – where cyclists are approaching from. For that, using the “wing” mirrors (or door mirrors, or side mirrors, depending on your vehicle…) seems to be much more effective. Using the Dutch Reach, your view of the high risk area is obstructed by the car’s door and boot pillars. If you’re a passenger in the rear of the car, then maybe the Dutch Reach is a bit more effective.
I suppose one advantage of the Dutch Reach is it gets people to think about checking for cyclists (and other road users). Whilst I think properly checking the mirrors (and not the Dutch Reach) is best, the vast majority of drivers (and passengers) don’t seem to think to check at all before opening doors – so if the Dutch Reach triggers them to think then I guess that’s a good thing.
It also slows down the actual
It also slows down the actual opening of the door. When you open it with the hand nearest it, the instinct is to thrust it open by opening the angle of your elbow, which can be quite a quick action; whereas opening with the opposite hand requires you to twist your whole body in the seat, which is generally much slower.
The description on the AA
The description on the AA website incorporates checking mirrors as you turn to reach the handle, so making it more like what I was taught on motorcycle training, mirrors first then shoulder check into blindspots.
The Surrey police comment
The Surrey police comment nails it, as always. A safe overtake will generally mean crossing the centre line. Which is why is irrelevant if cyclists are in a row, two abreast or riding in the middle of the road. If you can’t see clearly to overtake then don’t do it. The only person putting anyone in danger is the driver who decides to overtake when they can’t see that the way ahead is clear. I don’t know why people find this complicated.
So true, if vehicles can pass
So true, if vehicles can pass you coming in the opposite direction whilst riding two abreast then they can pass you going in the same direction – we call that overtaking. I don’t know of any riders who ride two abreast when it brings them into conflict with oncoming traffic, they don’t tend to live very long, but if there are any remaining would they please ride single file in those circumstances for their own health and so drivers can overtake. Otherwise, fill your boots.
There’s a particularly
There’s a particularly staggering piece by Richard Littlejohn on the Mail website this morning. Gems include:
The new code, planned to come into force on January 29, gives priority to cyclists and pedestrians under all circumstances. Bikers are encouraged to ride two or three abreast in the middle of the road, deliberately to slow traffic to a crawl.
and
The revised Highway Code is just the latest example of how virtually every area of public policy has been surrendered to a cabal of blinkered, neo-communist fanatics. Look at the lunatics now formulating ruinous ‘green’ energy generation plans under a so-called ‘Conservative’ Government. Not content with making us all colder and poorer, they are also determined to make getting around slower, too.They must be out of their tiny Chinese minds.
Good. I enjoy seeing
Good. I enjoy seeing unthinking reactionaries like him busting a blood vessel. Every sentence is speckled with his own spittle, to the point that it is clear it’s just another unthinking rant. It will appeal only to similar minded oafs who are never going to understand or care anyway. To anyone else, he looks like the local drunk propping up the bar at 11pm, gibbering incoherently at, well, anything at all really.
‘They must be out of their
‘They must be out of their tiny Chinese minds’ ?? What?
Lukas wrote:
Apparently, according to his closely argued political analysis, anyone advocating cycle lanes is trying to impose Chairman Mao’s Great Leap Forward onto the UK. As he is so fond of saying himself, you couldn’t make it up.
Rendel Harris wrote:
And as Dave Badiel was fond of saying of Richard Littlec0ck
“You can, and you did”
https://www.youtube.com/watch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ9pOIaeufQ
These climate change deniers
These climate change deniers are far more dangerous than antivaxxers.
IanMK wrote:
I agree, but there’s a fairly large intersection between the two