Transport minister Grant Shapps hospitalised (and thanks his helmet) after cycling crash; Giro d’Italia stages revealed; Homemade e-bike; Bernal denies Ineos rift; Insane climbing; Dear Deidre: Strava edition; Sagan looks to future + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Transport minister Grant Shapps hospitalised after cycling crash
In and out of hospital after coming off my bike while out this weekend. Big thanks to brilliant NHS staff @enherts QE2 & Lister Hospitals who patched me up yesterday, followed by a minor op on my lip today. Thank goodness for bike helmet, without which it could have been worse!
— Rt Hon Grant Shapps MP (@grantshapps) November 7, 2021
Boris Johnson’s transport minister Grant Shapps was in hospital this weekend after “coming off” his bike. Shapps said he was treated at the QEII Hospital in Welwyn Garden City and the Lister Hospital, where he was “patched up” on Saturday before “a minor op on my lip today [Sunday]”.
The MP for Welwyn Hatfield in Hertfordshire took a moment to thank his bike helmet, “without which it could have been worse”.
Perhaps inevitably, some of the reaction has been people pointing out that Shapps is in as good a position as anyone to influence people wearing helmets…one “public transport campaigner” replied: “Please publicise this more grant. Lots of people on pushbikes this weekend valued at £5k and yet won’t pay £20 for a helmet. Glad you are safe and recovering.”
Despite the government repeatedly saying it will not mandate compulsory helmets, the issue has been raised on a couple occasions times by the party’s MPs. In 2019, former Tory MP for Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock, Bill Grant, said the government should intervene to protect cyclists by making helmet-wearing mandatory.
Back in 2015, David Cameron’s transport minister Robert Goodwill said he doesn’t wear a helmet while cycling in London, but does when cycling “furiously” in Yorkshire. Goodwill pointed out mandatory helmet-wearing can deter people from cycling, and “the health benefits of cycling in terms of heart disease and obesity and everything else far outweigh the number of people killed and injured using cycles.”
Giro d'Italia sprint stages announced
Stage 6: Palmi – Scalea pic.twitter.com/8bMmxJ5lwz
— La Flamme Rouge (@laflammerouge16) November 8, 2021
The Giro is doing its route announcement slightly differently this year. No big buffet announcement. Instead, it’s more like a starter, dessert, main course approach. Unconventional, but worth a try?
Today the ‘flat’ stages have all been released in one block. Stages 5, 6, 11, 13, 18. That’s your starter.
Stage 13: Sanremo – Cuneo pic.twitter.com/qfLIiQ1XQC
— La Flamme Rouge (@laflammerouge16) November 8, 2021
There’ll also be a sprint stage on the third stage of the race, the final day in Hungary. That was announced as part of the Grande Partenza reveal last week. Tomorrow, for dessert you’ll be getting the medium mountain stages, before the main course of the high mountain stages on Wednesday. The final stage, expected to be a TT in Verona, will be revealed on Thursday, if you’ve got any space for a post-dinner coffee…
Stage 18: Borgo Valsugana – Treviso pic.twitter.com/g9GZpIUAKl
— La Flamme Rouge (@laflammerouge16) November 8, 2021
The Monowheel: Making the strangest e-bike
"There is no problem. I never spoke to Israel Start-Up Nation": Egan Bernal denies Ineos Grenadiers rift
Egan Bernal has poured cold water on the rumours he is unhappy at Ineos Grenadiers and is looking for a move away from the team. Speaking to Spanish newspaper Marca, the Colombian said he has no issue with the team, nor Adam Yates, and has not spoken to Israel Start-Up Nation. It had been rumoured Bernal was posturing for a move to the team to ride alongside his former teammate Chris Froome.
“I never spoke to Israel,” Bernal denied. “Obviously many things are said, there is news. But I didn’t want to get into that game of saying ‘I’m not leaving’. Nothing ever happened.”
When asked if there had been a problem at the Vuelta, where Bernal finished sixth and teammate Yates fourth, the 24-year-old said: “No, no, no, no. But it is not, really. With Yates I got along super well. He seems like a super calm person to me. A classy cyclist. I really liked him. I think it was the first race I did with him and it was all great. There is no problem, really.”
Looking ahead to 2022, the Giro champion said he would like another shot at the Tour de France, but admitted he is not yet back to 100 per cent after a back injury. “We have to wait a little longer to know the plans for everything,” Bernal continued. “My idea is to go to the Tour and I don’t know if to the Giro. If it is not in 2022, I will return to the Giro very soon because it is one of the races that I like the most.”
The next Egan Bernal? How far would you get?
¡Cómo va tan sobrado este pequeño ciclista!
¡No hay quien lo pille! 😱😓 pic.twitter.com/0SoObIzoEx— ADN Ciclista (@adnciclista) November 7, 2021
Egan Bernal may be happy at Ineos, but how long until this young lad’s a teammate…
road.cc Recommends Episode 8: All this month's top tested kit, a Salisbury Plain gravel ride + a cyclist-approved cafe stop
Want to know what’s been top of the pile on road.cc in the last month? Becca and Liam are back with the products that have made it into road.cc recommends this month. We’ll be picking our product of the month, and there’s also a route around Salisbury Plain in Wiltshire, and a recommended cafe stop in Sussex too.
And for the full list of bikes, kit and tech, head over to the Recommends section of the site…
Peter Sagan: Part of the beauty of cycling has been lost because of Covid
It’s not just Egan Bernal who spoke to Marca over the weekend. Peter Sagan shared the podium with the Colombian at the Giro d’Italia Criterium in Dubai this weekend and spoke to the Spanish outlet about his future in the sport. The three-time world champion will join TotalEnergies in the new year.
“I have new motivations, it will be good for me. Seeing new faces always makes you have to have a different mentality. I’m looking forward to it starting. the season, to start strong, and that is a good sign,” Sagan explained.
The 31-year-old also spoke about the impact of Covid on the sport…”The only thing that the virus has done is to make everything difficult, I think that now it is much worse in this sense. I do not think that now the races are more fun, on the contrary, part of the beauty of cycling has been lost. It is difficult to travel, to meet, the emotion that people transmit, the fans that follow the races are lacking. Without people, cycling is different and worse.”
Is no bike lane safe?
Is no bike lane safe?
(TikTok handle: spncrr) pic.twitter.com/UjNyhM12l1
— Sarah 🍓 (@SarahJ_Berry) November 6, 2021
Even on the trails you’ll find someone in your way…
Dear Deidre, my cycling pals don't give me Strava kudos...what should I do?
The Sun’s problem page has taken a break from affairs and office romances today…and it’s cycling on the agenda.
One cyclist wrote in to say his riding pals stopped sharing their updates on Instagram and Strava, to the point where there are just three of them left. Now, however, the admin only comments on the other two riders’ posts.
“It got me down so I blocked him and left the group. Why would he keep slighting me like that?”
Deidre’s advice…”It could be that algorithms meant he rarely saw your updates – and so was not ignoring you. What a shame. It sounds like you really enjoyed the camaraderie of this group. Could you join another group and all go out cycling together?”
Is Strava good for your mental health? A 2020 university study found the app can create “obsessive tendencies which need to be avoided”.
Get well soon messages for Grant Shapps
Really sorry to hear about your fall – we wish you a speedy recovery and hope to see you back out cycling again in the near future!
— Cycling UK (@WeAreCyclingUK) November 8, 2021
Labour’s shadow transport team were among the well-wishers hoping for a speedy recovery, tweeting: “Hope you’re OK Grant Shapps. Wishing you a speedy recovery.”
Labour MP Karl Turner added: “Hope you recover speedily.”
Glad to hear you’re okay and hope you make a speedy recovery!
— Brent Cycling Campaign (@BrentCyclists) November 7, 2021
Beethoven Strava art
Our Strava art archive is a bit of a rabbit hole…
- There was the Strava artist pedalling through London’s streets to sketch a huge snowman…
- The Aussie cyclist who recreated Nirvana’s inconic Nevermind album cover in GPS form…
- And the Bristol cyclist who took first place in the Bristol Cycle Festival competition for his ‘Fowl Play’…
Two men face seven years in prison over Italy's stolen track bikes and €400k of damage
Two men arrested by Romanian police face up to seven years in prison for their part in the Italian track cycling team having their bikes stolen while they competed at the UCI World Track Cycling World Championships in Roubaix. Police in Vrancea County located 21 of the 22 bikes, including Filippo Ganna’s gold Pinarello, along with mobile phones, drugs and around £5,000 worth of cash.
Cycling Weekly reports two of the four men arrested, an 18-year-old Frenchman of Bosnian descent and a 20-year-old Bosnian, will appear before courts in Lille and face up to seven years in prison. Both men have admitted to the theft but have not given details about other possible perpatrators.
The men are in pre-trial detention awaiting their hearing on December 10.
Not another helmet debate...Grant Shapps reaction
Helmets do not reduce road danger @grantshapps. Safe space for cycling does. https://t.co/eIzEHIlugn
— Real Gaz on a proper bike #fbpe (@gazza_d) November 8, 2021
Okay, just a few quick helmet-related comments…
If only he was the transport minister who could influence investment in changing road layouts to protect people cycling rather than using the comfort blanket of a little polystyrene hat. https://t.co/3A3C6Mimmk
— The Ranty Highwayman (@RantyHighwayman) November 8, 2021
if you’re shouting about cycle helmets and not campaigning for safe cycling space instead then you’re actually anti-cycling.
Helmets don’t reduce road danger
They don’t make the road space more inviting for ppl to start cycling.
They are an anti public health measure— Real Gaz on a proper bike #fbpe (@gazza_d) November 8, 2021
And while a few people were put off by Shapps’ comment about the helmet helping him out, especially considering how few details have been released about the incident, everything we know about the weekend’s events is in the earlier blog post.
On Facebook, Tony IIes commented: “Glad he’s not badly injured. Hoping this will focus his mind on a much better network of segregated cycle lanes.”
We really don’t want another helmet debate. Not everyone else did either…some just wanted to point out Shapps must be used to helmets, working so closely with them on a daily basis…credit to whoever dropped that zinger earlier (it has now mysteriously vanished). Step forward to take the applause…
8 November 2021, 09:00
8 November 2021, 09:00
8 November 2021, 09:00
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 £2.49. 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.
96 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@mitsky Nail on head time there. Police, time, resource, all wrapped up in one little sentence.
@mdavidford Could that lack of fluency in English possibly be described as irksome?
@mdavidford Could that lack of fluency in English possibly be described as irksome?
@Mr Blackbird motorists who drink alcohol should be required to pass the test twice, once sober and once after three drinks in two hours. Then they can get an endorsement on their licence for driving home from the pub after a few pints.
In France, the closer the cyclist gets to the Mediterranean Sea, the weirder car drivers behave. Some of them being repeat road deliquents. Encounters with 13, 31, 34 and 84 may prove hairy. Drivers with plates showing 84 (Vaucluse) think light signalling is no longer necessary before making a turn or exiting a roundabout. Pity UAE Team came to the decision not to press charges.
@MaxiMinimalist We can fear such a ban to varying degrees. But I'd be surprised if it happens. Even if it does the police don't have the resource and time to deal with dangerous drivers. So I guess they will ignore it anway.
Sooner or later, there will be public calls for cycling ban on specific roads and / or at specific times of the day. The great divide that separates cyclists from drivers of motorized vehicles with 4-plus wheels isn't going to narrow anytime soon. In spite of the net-zero madness, there is zip political ambition to allocate massive funds to cycling, build proper infrastructure, elaborate a nationwide integrated cycling network, educate all road users. Why? Because motorists of all kinds are voters and taxpayers.
@Smoggysteve Right - as I say, though - that's a separate debate, that I'll leave to others.
AS I read this, I was wondering hao many other legal e-bikes may have been seized and crushed as a result of this bogus test? As I pointed out recently in a reply to a Facebook post that stated that e-bikes are limited to 25kph/15.5mph any bike, whether a pure pedal cycle or an e-bike, can exceed this speed if the rider can pedal hard enough, or when going downhill. The regulation just states that the motor must switch off at higher speeds. If the rider can achieve higher speeds unaided, that is legal. The test that the police used just demonstrated the maximum "speed" achieved by pedal power alone with no or little resistance can be much higher than the motor cut-off speed.
@ROOTminus1 Unfortunately, people will still do all they can to get past. the MGIFs can't help themselves and are a danger to everyone not only the cyclist.
96 thoughts on “Transport minister Grant Shapps hospitalised (and thanks his helmet) after cycling crash; Giro d’Italia stages revealed; Homemade e-bike; Bernal denies Ineos rift; Insane climbing; Dear Deidre: Strava edition; Sagan looks to future + more on the live blog”
I find this helmet debate a
I find this helmet debate a massive distraction from the main issue of incentivising much more of the populance to cycle, which would ultimately lead to no one needing to wear a helmet unless doing sporting cycling.
Exactly.
Exactly.
I’m wondering what caused him to fall off – was it slippery leaves, mechanical failure or a collision?
hawkinspeter wrote:
Yes, it would seem much more helpful if his comments focused on what caused the crash and how to reduce the chance of similar happening.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Or just wearing a helmet, thus giving him a false sense of security and therefore paying less attention to what he is doing. Cyclists who wear helmets have more collisions.
eburtthebike wrote:
Especially if you wear it wrong so it falls over your eyes
hawkinspeter wrote:
Gods, but that man is a f-ing idiot
Chill, Babe. You’re just
Chill, Babe. You’re just going to have to live with it.
brooksby wrote:
That’s just his bumbling idiot act – he’s far more dangerous than that.
Johnson didn’t use to wear a
Johnson didn’t use to wear a helmet whilst cycling round London. I think his PR people told him he should to avoid getting into a helmet debate. (Not that there’s any debate that Johnson is a helmet…)
hawkinspeter wrote:
If you look closely at the photo in hawkinspeter’s post, you can see an extraneous skin tab sticking out of the helmet. The official name for this useless flap of skin is Boris Johnson (or Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson in full).
I must admit the more usual
I must admit the more usual approach to wearing them that I see is pushed right back on the head leaving the forehead/ temples exposed. In my 40+ years as a cyclist I have found many novel and interesting ways of falling of a bike but none have ever led to an impact on the back of my head.
The reason for raising this is twofold
1. Data on death/ injury with/ without helmet takes no account of whether the helmet was being worn correctly
2. Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson is a completely different sort of bellend to the rest of us.
For what it is worth, I wear a helmet because I believe it will reduce the risk of injury in some circumstances, but also a well designed and ventilated helmet in my experience increases airflow and hence cooling across my head compared to no helmet.
SimoninSpalding wrote:
How does that work? I’ve always felt that a bike helmet tends to warm my head rather than cooling it.
Potentially a specific use
Potentially a specific use case, but in spite of my advancing years I have a thick, luxuriant (if slightly fluffy) growth of hair up top and without hat it tends to prevent airflow close the scalp and insulates. My helmet has the dual effects of flattening my hair and speeding up airflow by channelling it through the vents and increasing evaporation/ cooling. It may be that I am the only person that finds this.
For avoidance of doubt, I choose to wear a helmet, I see it as one of a range of measures I take to try to come home in one piece from a ride (like riding assertively / defensively, avoiding badly designed junctions where a couple of other cyclists have tragically lost their lives etc.), but I would in no way advocate compulsion.
SimoninSpalding wrote:
Luckily, my genes have allowed me to develop a strategic cooling area on my head to maximise airflow.
hawkinspeter wrote:
You may be in the minority on this forum – sounds like head-cooling devices could find a use here…
SimoninSpalding wrote:
— SimoninSpaldingWhen the original research by Thompson, Rivara and Thompson, which showed 85% effectiveness, was proved to be the baddest of bad science and completely totally utterly BS, they had to find a way to weasel out of the refutations; answer? the helmets weren’t being worn right.
I’m not aware of any evidence or data showing that helmets don’t work because they aren’t worn right, and there was no suggestion of that in the study that found the 85% figure, so it is at best unproven, and at worst, more bad science by possibly the baddest scientists in the history of science.
I think the point I wanted to
I think the point I wanted to make (and didn’t do very well) is that trying to draw any conclusions on the effectiveness or otherwise of something like a helmet based on accident data is fraught with problems because there are so many other variables at play, and I think this is criticism of the research you refer to. But, as the scientific community will say absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. By contrast there is a huge amount of data produced in controlled laboratory conditions about car occupant safety which has successfully debunked the old theory that seatbelts didn’t save lives and you were better off being thrown clear.
SimoninSpalding wrote:
— SimoninSpaldingYes there is; but like cycle helmets, controlled laboratory conditions aren’t real life, and seat belts are just like cycle helmets; hyped to the limit, but not proven to reduce deaths. They don’t reduce deaths because, like all “safety” interventions which make the user feel safer, they are subject to risk compensation, so drivers wearing seat belts take more risks, and other people, mostly pedestrians and cyclists, die.
The safest car wouldn’t have seat belts, crumple zones, side impact bars, but it would have a 35cm rusty bayonet sticking out of the steering wheel. Trying to improve safety by protecting car occupants is self defeating, but since car companies and legislators don’t care about people outside the car, they’re allowed to carry on, and blame pedestrians and cyclists for not wearing hi-viz and helmets.
Or perhaps poor riding?
Or perhaps poor riding?
OldRidgeback wrote:
It’d have to be very poor riding to just spontaneously fall off – there’s usually another factor involved.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Once I fell off indoors after a particularly gruelling turbo session and nearly hit my head on the corner of a desk, which was probably the most potentially dangerous yet the one occasion I was not wearing a helmet!
PRSboy wrote:
Well, that sounds like you missed the desk because you weren’t wearing a helmet. If you were wearing one, you’d have hit the desk and possibly a washing machine too.
Probably should have been
Probably should have been wearing a Q-Collar; the only device approved by the FDA to reduce brain injuries…
Everyone whould be wearing
Everyone whould be wearing one of those then.
Let’s not go for PPE as the first resort to a problem.
Oh exactly; but if we’re
Oh exactly; but if we’re going to recommend PPE, we might as well recommend PPE that has been proven to work…
What’s it like cycling with
What’s it like cycling with it on ?
“Lots of people on pushbikes
“Lots of people on pushbikes this weekend valued at £5k and yet won’t pay £20 for a helmet…”
If I had a £5k bike I wouldn’t want a £20 helmet!
That said I do usually wear a helmet.
Ride On wrote:
I just recently picked up a cheapo helmet from Aldi although my bike isn’t quite worth £5k. I’m yet to be convinced that more expensive bike helmets provide significantly more safety benefits despite the marketing hyperbole. (I usually purchase bike helmets based on how they look)
Oh I have no doubt they are
Oh I have no doubt they are all pretty much the same (polystyrene covered in plastic) but a some hats look ? while some look more ?.
hawkinspeter wrote:
I just recently picked up a cheapo helmet from Aldi although my bike isn’t quite worth £5k. I’m yet to be convinced that more expensive bike helmets provide significantly more safety benefits despite the marketing hyperbole. (I usually purchase bike helmets based on how they look)— Ride On
Aside from some questionable claims, mostly what you pay for is less weight and more ventilation. I.e. more comfort for the same (mandatory) level of protection.
wycombewheeler wrote:
It doesn’t feel any heavier than other bike helmets though I haven’t bothered weighing it. It’s definitely lighter than the HedKayse that I’ve got and also more comfortable.
hawkinspeter wrote:
You’re right, and it’s almost completely the opposite of expensive=better protection. Expensive helmets are optimised for weight and aerodynamics and style, not providing protection, whereas cheap helmets are designed for one thing; to pass the tests.
hawkinspeter wrote:
I just recently picked up a cheapo helmet from Aldi although my bike isn’t quite worth £5k.[b] I’m yet to be convinced that more expensive bike[/b] helmets [b]provide significantly more[/b] safety [b]benefits despite the marketing hyperbole[/b]. (I usually purchase bike helmets based on how they look)— Ride OnIndeed so, but is it any different for bicycles, and might not a susceptibility to marketing hyperbole afflict the poor sap equally for both items?
Sriracha wrote:
Some of it is marketing, but there’s clear functional differences between bikes e.g. disk brakes, groupsets etc.
Always weird that any
Always weird that any accident involving a cyclist immediately turns to helmet advocacy.
Pedestrians and motor vehicle occupants have a much higher incidence of head injury yet helmets are never discussed as an option for these transport modes.
UCL study in 2018 of UK transport deaths:
Also interesting that men are far more likely to suffer injury than women. Maybe helmets for men only, especially when driving.
Do you happen to have a link
Do you happen to have a link to or a title for that study? I’d be interested to read it.
https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk
https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10053381/
sean1 wrote:
That’s because people like Angela Lee and other helmet zealots, have spent forty years deliberately, consciously lying about the risks of cycling, so that they can sell helmets. All the while claiming to be acting in the best interests of cyclists and society; the path to hell is paved with good intentions.
Looking at those graphs,
Looking at those graphs, cyclists have the highest percentage of cause of death by head injury. Pedestrians aren’t far behind, but it’s much lower for driving.
What you’d actually need to look at the incidence of head injuries of pedestrians, cyclists and drivers by time spent doing each activity.
Yes you can do analysis based
Yes you can do analysis based on distance or time travelled.
The report covers this:
“The fatal head injury rate is highest for cyclists by time travelled and for pedestrians using distance travelled.”
However in absolute terms there is more potential to save lives by encouraging drivers and pedestrians to wear helmets than cyclists.
So to summarise, ignore
So to summarise, ignore cyclists because they are in the minority?
No. The reverse. Consider
No. The reverse. Consider drivers and pedestrians because they are the majority of fatalities.
AidanR wrote:
But if you want to save the maximum number of lives, helmets for cyclists comes third on the list. “If it saves one live, it’s worth it” how about the 1300 pedestrian lives?
AidanR wrote:
Why by time? If my choice is walk to work, or cycle to work, it doesn’t matter that walking takes longer, only that I have greater risk of fatal head injury
If course of my purpose is getting 2 hours exercise, then time is relevant
wycombewheeler wrote:
Neither time or distance is perfect, but I think most people would choose their method of commuting by time. I could walk my commute, but it’d take 2.5 hours each way so I cycle it instead.
I agree. Now there’s a link to the report, I can see that cycling and walking have a comparable number number of head injuries (more for pedestrians by distance, more for cyclists by time). Therefore it’s quite legitimate to argue that if cyclists would have to wear helmets then pedestrians should too. I suspect the main reason this isn’t contemplated is because walking is (reasonably) seen as a normal activity which everyone has the right to do, whereas cycling is (unreasonably) seen as a choice people make that puts them in harm’s way.
AidanR wrote:
Fair points, but they all fall when you look at the whole population data for cycle helmets; they don’t save lives, so it is pointless to argue that anyone should wear them, let alone make it a law.
eburtthebike wrote:
Interesting. Do you have a link to that data?
A good overview of health
A good overview of health issues associated with helmet use.
https://theconversation.com/ditching-bike-helmets-laws-better-for-health-42
It has some some useful links into relevant studies.
AidanR wrote:
— AidanR Interesting. Do you have a link to that data?— eburtthebikeSorry, I’m sick of posting, reposting, and re-re-posting this stuff. Do some research; google is your friend; maybe.
wycombewheeler wrote:
Another useful way to measure risk is by trip.
eburtthebike wrote:
I think plastic helmets are quite good for the injuries caused by trips, whether of the badly laid paving slab or the one too many pills variety.
TheBillder wrote:
No; clearly, according to all the helmet zealots, they only work for cyclists.
sean1 wrote:
And there’s always an anecdote along the lines of “a part of my body which would never be protected by a helmet was injured; I am so glad I was wearing a helmet”
What you might be saying is –
What you might be saying is – if only Kim Briggs had been wearing a helmet?
Also not stepping out into
Also not stepping out into the road looking at your mobile phone can help.
sean1 wrote:
She wasn’t; Alliston invented that.
I didn’t realise that. I
I didn’t realise that. I often hear this mentioned in relation to the Briggs/Alliston case but I wasn’t aware it was disputed and possibly made up by Alliston. There was CCTV footage of the incident although in this article is doesn’t mention if the CCTV confirms the use (or not) of the mobile phone.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40927791
She did have a phone on her.
She did have a phone on her. I thought allison claimed she was using it but then backed down. No evidence that she was using it at the time.
Cyclist gets hit by a car –
Cyclist gets hit by a car – handwringing masses “cyclists should wear helmets”
Pedestrian gets hit by cyclist – mob with pitchforks “cyclists should be better regulated.”
Pedestrian gets hit by a car – tumbleweeds
“3 pedestrians killed by
“3 pedestrians killed by drunk driver in horror crash. Witnesses report the victims were not wearing fluorescent jackets or helmets while using the pavement.”
Yep, just as stupid as some of the reporting we see regarding cycling deaths…
Call me sadistic if you like,
Call me sadistic if you like, but i’ve been hoping this epetition reaches 10,000 over the last month, just so MPs can debate licencing bikes again (For like the 50th time) and then the Government can respond with “No”.
The epetition in question: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/585474
Jenova20 wrote:
I’d rather they just get on with their jobs and improve things rather than pandering to whoever shouts loudest.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Agree with that – we don’t need them wasting time arguing over whether it’s a WING MIRROR or a DOOR MIRROR.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Ever so slightly optimistic; by about a million percent.
No no no. Why throw away
No no no. Why throw away freedoms?
Why
Why
Call me sadistic if you like,
[quote=Jenova20]
Call me sadistic if you like, but i’ve been hoping this epetition reaches 10,000 over the last month, just so MPs can debate licencing bikes again (For like the 50th time) and then the Government can respond with “No”.
The epetition in question: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/585474
As much as I hate this government their response is the the correct one. We are trying to encourage more people to cycle for health and environmental reasons yet what you’re proposing with your petition will discourage that. Which begs the question; are you a keen cyclist or are you just here to antagonise the cycling community. Either way I would suggest you drop your petition.
Lincolnshire Mamil]
Not my petition, you’ve misunderstood. And i haven’t signed it.
Love it, raised by Mr
Love it, raised by Mr Loophole himself! No doubt he’s decided there’s a market for getting celebrity cyclists off with speeding and jumping red lights
shoko wrote:
HOLY CRAP! I didn’t even clock that! This makes it even better then: Come december it will either be ignored because it doesn’t have enough signatures, or ignored by the Government for the obvious reasons we’ve all heard before.
While the epetitions can be useful for direct Democracy there really should be a barrier to allowing the same petitions to keep going up over and over. Maybe don’t allow another epetition to go live on something the Government has already debated in their term.
Jenova20 wrote:
8558 signatures to this peition from “top lawyer” Nick Freeman, wonder if our resident autophile has signed it?
In all seven of their
In all seven of their usernames, no doubt!
brooksby wrote:
Even if it does reach 10,000 they’ll debate it, and the Government will just say “No”, as they have every other time this has been asked for by idiot motorists. That’s what I thought was so amusing about this.
Jenova20 wrote:
10,000 just gets you a response from government (which you could get just by writing a letter); you need 100,000 for a debate. But in any case, I’d be interested if any petition on the Parliamentary petition site (on any subject) has actually led to a change of policy.
Steve K wrote:
and the response will be “No this is a really stupid idea, that provides no benefit for a large administrative cost.”
Tbf whilst we have no details
Tbf whilst we have no details about this crash,let’s not immediately jump to the conclusion that Shapps is saying the helmet was the usual ‘it saved my life’ thing, if he cut his lip, it’s possible the helmet did stop this from being worse in that it helped prevent road rash to his head, which is what we say helmets are useful for.
Though I doubt I’ll stop this from turning into another 200 comment epic about helmets, but it was just a thought.
That lad’s face at the end!
That lad’s face at the end! That’s what it’s all about.
The father (?) was totally
The father (?) was totally out of breath just walking up behind him. Well done that lad, I doubt I would have been further up then whatever monentum at the start took me.
Quote:
That’s an unorthodox approach to meal planning, but OK…
John Shuttleworth most
John Shuttleworth most certainly would not approve.
I’ve been told when stopping
I’ve been told when stopping mid ride, it’s best to start with your sweet, so the body quickly has fuel to start again, before finishing with something which will digest slower and keep you going through the rest of the ride/to the next food stop.
Re. Land Rovers on
Re. Land Rovers on mountainbike trails. This pic is from a family cycling holiday a few years ago. Location: a green lane somewhere in Dorset.
bUt ThEy DoN’t PaY lAnE tAx!
bUt ThEy DoN’t PaY lAnE tAx!
“We called to deliver your
“We called to deliver your package, but nobody was in…”
My first thought was stolen
My first thought with the Van was stolen and then dumped away from the road whilst emptied. Then I realised it was yodel so was probably following the SatNav.
We figured it was a sat nav
We figured it was a sat nav issue. It was a green lane, so technically a public road. The van was stuck at least a km in, halfway up a steep hill, so presumably they got so far along they felt they had to push on. On our way out we met the crew of the tow truck sent to get it. They had to abandon the truck some distance away and were scratching their heads about the rescue…
I used to deliver for DHL a
I used to deliver for DHL a couple of decades ago. More than once I got a van stuck in places Land Rovers wouldn’t normally go, let alone a Mercedes Sprinter while delivering parcels in and around the Peak District in Derbyshire.
Can this be linked to
Can this be linked to hawkinspeter or Cap’n Badger? 😉
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-bath-railway-path-close-6175056
brooksby wrote:
I don’t think I’ve ever dug a sett, so clearly not me.
That’s going to be an annoying detour for a lot of commuters but I can easily imagine it getting flooded – there’s often rainwater dripping through the roof.
Well, y’know: squirrels
Well, y’know: squirrels/badgers – all small furry creatures, all the same, aren’t they? 😉
They reckon that a mile long section of the Path will be closed, with a detour adding an extra half mile (through, of course, the lovely suburban roads the Path is supposed to help you avoid). And: eight weeks of repairs??? Not exactly pushing themselves, are they?
brooksby wrote:
I always get more confused between stoats and weasels.
The detour looks awkward – I’d be more tempted to use Staple Hill Rd (north of that map) and at least go in a straight line even if that is busier.
That diversion would only
That diversion would only work if they have got some very impressive signage up to tell people where to go. That is VERY different from simply getting on the Path and keeping going in a straight line…
I think this demonstrates
I think this demonstrates that making roads safer for cyclists is still important. My suggestions are a default 20mph speed limit in built up areas and suitable punishments for inconsiderate, careless and dangerous driving.
Think how much cheaper it would be than cycle lanes.
Bungle_52 wrote:
20mph is still too fast, especially when most drivers ignore it. 12mph (20kph) is much better.
road.cc wrote:
The blogger doth protest too much.
mdavidford wrote:
The blogger doth protest too much.— road.cc
I’m surprised they didn’t tell us whether he had rim or disc brakes.