“I think this is talent at this point”: Possibly the filthiest drivetrain this bike shop has ever laid eyes on; Jeremy Vine called “nasty” for filming law-breaking drivers; Was Wout van Aert sabotaged?; Extreme tyre clearance + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
"I think this is talent at this point": Possibly the filthiest drivetrain this bike shop has ever laid eyes on
Sheesh…
There were jockey wheels in there at one point and there presumably still are, but good luck getting a look at them. From the frayed derailleur cable, to grimy wheels and rims, via THOSE jockey wheels. This is the sort of bike any mechanic would be more than justified including a muck tax on any labour.
It would be good to know just how long it takes without cleaning to get your drivetrain looking like this, although Malmö and Lund-based bike shop Fridhems Cykel didn’t offer too many more details other than the pics.
“Just a little dirty!” they wrote, evidently seeing the funny side.
View this post on Instagram
We’ll leave the final word to the commenter who said, at this point, they’d say getting a bike to look like that is actually a talent. Not quite as impressive as managing to round off your chainrings to a near-perfect circle, but impressive nonetheless.
Clean your bike, kids!
“Cheating will be part of cycling forever”: MPCC's Emily Brammeier on anti-doping
Transport for London announces ten Santander Cycles named after inspirational female cyclists for International Women’s Day
Transport for London said there were more than 150 public nominations for pioneering female cyclists, community leaders and everyday heroes who were put forward to have a Santander Cycle named after them.
Here’s the full list of winners TfL forwarded to us today:
- Annahita Benbow– Founder of Northwest Pedal Express in Brent, recognised for leading weekly bike buses that help children travel to school safely and confidently. While TfL builds infrastructure, Annahita ensures the next generation knows how to use it – teaching skills, building confidence and championing road safety
- Carol Summers– London Ambulance Service paramedic of more than 20 years and Cycle Response Unit leader, honoured for inspiring confidence in female paramedics to cycle and responding to 999 calls by bike.
- Emily Chappell– Ultracyclist, courier and author, celebrated for inspiring women and girls to see cycling as a route to adventure and confidence. The first female finisher of the Transcontinental Race, she has encouraged countless riders to push their limits through her writing and community support
- Harjit Kaur Lakhan– Sikh Cycling Club leader, honoured for helping women (particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds) to access cycling. She mentors new riders, leads inclusive rides and removes cultural, financial and confidence barriers, all while undertaking major charity challenges
- Jean Dollimore– Camden cycling campaigner for more than two decades. Drawing on her data expertise, she has shaped local decisions on safer cycling infrastructure, contributed to key policy documents and supported countless consultations. Her calm, evidence-driven advocacy has made Camden a leader in active travel
- Dr Jenny Drife– Consultant Psychiatrist leading the START Homeless Mental Health Outreach Team. She cycles daily across Lambeth and Southwark to reach rough sleepers in parks, tents and hostels, providing care where it’s needed most. A fearless all-weather rider and inspiring role model
- Naomi Rumble– Director of Together We Ride (TWR), recognised for empowering women (especially Black women) to embrace cycling joyfully and confidently. She champions diversity, body positivity and belonging, building a supportive London cycling community
- Samra Said– Chair and Ride Leader of Cycle Sisters, who received the highest number of nominations. Under her leadership, Samra has transformed access to cycling for Muslim and ethnically diverse women, growing the network to more than 2,200 riders. She creates spaces where women feel welcome, empowered and safe, and is described as “life‑changing” by those she leads
- Terry Clarke– U3A cycling group leader whose weekly rides along back streets and lanes to avoid the traffic, together with her boundless energy and encouragement, has helped people in later life discover and rediscover the benefits and camaraderie of cycling in a group. Her compassionate leadership, inclusive community spirit and dedication have inspired beginners, returning riders and those recovering from serious injury to get on their bikes
- Tessie Reynolds– Pioneering historical trailblazer who rode from Brighton to London and back in 1893, aged just 16, breaking the record at a time when women weren’t even recognised as cyclists. Riding in cycling shorts, she defied strict Victorian norms and faced hostility, yet her determination paved the way for generations of women riders
Kate? Is that you?
“Knifepoint” bikejacking in broad daylight captured on CCTV outside busy coffee shop
"Nothing suspicious has been reported": Race organiser responds to Wout van Aert "sabotage" comments, after puncture ends GP Samyn hopes
Late bike change for Wout van Aert! 😬
Van Aert faces a tough chase to get back to the front group at Samyn Classic! pic.twitter.com/bRfyd6L3J6
— Cycling on TNT Sports (@cyclingontnt) March 3, 2026
Wout van Aert’s run of bad luck really is extraordinary. Having missed Omloop through illness, that after returning from a season-ending cyclocross crash, the Belgian’s opening road race of 2026 ended with a puncture at GP Samyn yesterday.
Van Aert reckoned it “smells like sabotage” and suggested the race had been targeted.
“Not aimed at me, but it was always the same route, and suddenly there were shards of glass on the road. That’s a shame,” he said afterwards.
GP Samyn’s organiser Ludwig De Winter told Sporza he’s less certain and “nothing suspicious has been reported”.
“We already had a debriefing with the police and law enforcement yesterday, and nothing suspicious was reported. No, as far as we know, there was no incident or deliberate action on our route,” he said.
British National Road Race Championships return to Wales this summer
The iconic national champs bands will once again be decided in Wales this summer, the 2026 Lloyds National Road Championships also to be based out of Ceredigion, British Cycling has this morning announced.
The championships will run between 25 and 28 June, the governing body stating it is part of “a landmark agreement between British Cycling and the Welsh Government to see the next three national champs hosted in the country.
The time-trial will take place on Thursday 25 June 2026, the circuit race on Friday 26 June 2026, with the road race concluding the action on Sunday 28 June 2026.
As with last year, the Circuit Championships and Road Race Championships will once again start in Aberystwyth, while the Time Trial Championships course heads to Lampeter. Full routes will be announced at a later date.
Jack Sargeant, Wales’s Minister for Sport, commented: “Wales is fast becoming a top destination for world-class cycling, and the return of the Lloyds National Road Championships to Ceredigion is further proof of that.
“From the streets of Aberystwyth to the mountains at the heart of the south Wales valleys that’ll form part of the Tour de France Grand Départ route, we are determined that every part of Wales has the opportunity to share in the passion and economic benefits that major cycling events bring. Although Ceredigion doesn’t sit on the Tour de France route, events like this show outstanding cycling belongs across the whole of Wales – and we are committed to making that a reality.”
What tyre clearance?!
“We do not have a doping problem”: Tadej Pogačar’s agent opposes “stupid” plans to monitor riders’ power data, insisting cycling “now has credibility”
"Vine should start reporting cyclists rushing through red lights if he wants to play tell-tale": Former MP Kate Hoey claims "nasty" Jeremy Vine's camera footage got law-breaking taxi driver "six points and £500 fine"
Right, strap yourselves in, there’s a lot to unpack here…
So, according to former Labour MP Kate Hoey, who is now a life peer, the presenter, broadcaster and possibly London’s most famous cyclist, Jeremy Vine, rolled up to a taxi stopped in traffic, recorded the driver sat there, reported the footage to the police, and the driver was fined £500 and received six penalty points? That’s a lot of fines every day all around the country if we’re penalising motorists for sitting in traffic. Yes, yes, I’m being unbearably facetious, Hoey has obviously just forgotten to mention the exact offence, although we’d bet a fair wager it was something mobile phone related.
We then have a quite majestic rant from Hoey in the final paragraph, starting by calling Vine “nasty” (IF this all actually happened, we might add) for not wanting to share the road with a law-breaking, distracted operator of a two-tonne vehicle. Then we get the curious claim: “taxi wasn’t moving and as soon as it moved he would have stopped talking”. Right…
And to top it all off, the punchline to end all punchlines: “Vine should start reporting cyclists rushing through red lights if he wants to play tell tale.”
Whether it’s all true or not, Vine did deliver a delicious retweet of the post onto his profile, the Twitter equivalent of smiling in the face of red-faced road rage. We’ll try to check with him if he’s got any memory of this tale.
Chief concrete-growing correspondent Mike Graham naturally agreed with Hoey, the rest of the Twitter comments best avoided.
I think that’s enough of the Twitter cesspit for today.
Hoey is, of course, a legend of the anti-cycling bingo game and a dive into the road.cc archives will find stories about her spanning the best part of the past two decades. Back in 2022, she claimed the Highway Code changes (designed to better protect vulnerable road users) are a “nightmare” for drivers. And way back in 2013 she called for bikes to be registered and cyclists to pay “road tax”. See, an OG of the anti-cycling game…
Somewhat amusingly, having called cyclists “law-breaking Lycra louts”, Hoey was herself fined for driving through red light later that year.
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.
51 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
If you're not trying to escape from wild animals, what would be the advantage of putting a tent on top of a car, rather than setting up a similar tent on the ground? Seems rather unnecessary to me - even if the price was comparable, I would choose a ground-based version.
"you can’t pass a law saying it’s illegal not to have a speedometer if you’re going to go above the speed limit." I don't think this would be a good idea, nor even speed limits (and presumably mandatory speedometers everywhere) ... ... but is there any theoretical legal impediment to that? Or even simply enacting a law that cyclists are not permitted to ride faster on roads than the motor vehicle speed limit (or some other limit) and leaving it up to cyclists how they go about complying with that? (Not a lawyer not a legal theorist though...)
What has KE to do with it? If you are hit by a large object you don't absorb all its KE. Being hit by a car is no better than being hit by a bus at the same speed. What matters is how much acceleration you experience.
@Robert Hardy 20mph isn't as fast as you seem to think, this 57-year-old-not-that-fit rider can easily achieve it on the flat in still conditions and most averagely fit people can on a decent bike. The argument that it wouldn't be a problem to impose speed limits on cyclists because those who can achieve 20mph already have speedometers is an entirely specious one, firstly as I've said a huge number of people can achieve 20mph, not just Garmin-obsessed racers, and secondly you would have to make speedometers compulsory for everyone on a bike, you can't pass a law saying it's illegal not to have a speedometer if you're going to go above the speed limit. How many cycling incidents are caused by supposedly excessive speed? It wasn't a factor in this case, the cyclist would still have hit her if he'd been doing 15mph or even 10mph. Charlie Alliston was under the car speed limit. It's a non-issue and only of interest to those seeking yet another stick with which to beat cyclists.
(Usual reference to speed being the major issue as kinetic energy goes up with the square of velocity / much greater braking distances required etc)
@mdavidford steady on - an 80kg cyclist on a 20kg bike would only need to be doing a little over 89mph to have the same kinetic energy as a 2 ton car at 20mph. So same ballpark, really...
Yes, although it may be telling us as much about decision fixation as it is about the impact of such statements. By asking them about their plans before viewing the adverts, they primed those who said they would consider an SUV to ignore or rationalise away information that pointed against that decision. Ideally, they would have had additional cohorts that were not asked in advance and therefore not committed to a position, for comparison.
"in --substantial-- slight excess of a speed limit considered to offer reasonable safety to vulnerable road users *from two tonne metal boxes*." FTFY
I think we have forgotten that cars do way more damage and we still haven’t got a comprehensive-lasting solution to deal with dangerous drivers
51 thoughts on ““I think this is talent at this point”: Possibly the filthiest drivetrain this bike shop has ever laid eyes on; Jeremy Vine called “nasty” for filming law-breaking drivers; Was Wout van Aert sabotaged?; Extreme tyre clearance + more on the live blog”
Hooey by name…
As Cycling Mikey and many of us have observed, phone use behind the wheel often doesn’t end when the driver starts off from stationary…
Also, IIRC people take around 20-30 seconds to adjust to their surroundings after using their phone. The problem is that people think that it doesn’t take that long due to our brains “filling in” details, but that leads to so many cries of “they came from nowhere”.
It’s like with the Invisible Gorilla experiment – people’s attention is far more flawed than you might think.
https://practicalpie.com/invisible-gorilla/
Who wants zero traffic fatalities?
Helsinki has managed this: https://www.politico.eu/article/helsinki-no-traffic-death-roads-eu-accident-finland-driving-transport/
“Nasty”, “tell-tale” – you’re seventy-nine Kate, not seven.
Let’s not forget that Hooey is writing to appease her audiences mental age.
” He would have put the phone down” and would have ran over that 7 year old that’s now obscured by his bonnet🤦
We all know beyond any doubt that he would have. Just as the woman in this video clip did.
I can only speak for London, but we do have a massive problem now with RLJ cyclists, and it is hard to defend against the complaints from drivers. I’ve been cycling into London since the early 1990s and I’ve never seen it this bad. In fact I was saying to one of the cyclists I work with how I’m getting to the point where I’m thinking I should just do the same as everyone else, rather than stopping. Last night for example there was a cyclist who was the only one to stop at a couple of lights next to me, while as many as ten others ignored them. I was going to comment to him at the next set about being the only two people stopping, but he powered through that one on red, and the next one (I didn’t see him again).
The problem is that there are so many red lights that might not be appropriate for cyclists (e.g. a cyclist turning left at a junction can usually do so safely) and the problem is that this trains cyclists to evaluate exactly what the traffic lights are doing. The fact is that the vast majority of traffic lights are designed purely around controlling motorised vehicles. Ideally, there should be separated infrastructure around the traffic lights so that cyclists don’t have to continually sacrifice their energy by coming to a stop just so that they can accelerate away again.
Reply to Hawkinspeter
While I completely agree with what you say I still feel that we should obey the law. I always dismount if I want to go through a red, not ideal but it often saves time even though it is very inconvenient.
In general, obeying laws is a good idea, but not all laws are created equal. If a law makes it substantially harder for people to cycle (i.e. stopping and wasting their energy at all red lights), then is the law really fit for purpose?
Then change the law.
@MaxiMinimalist – I would love for the law to be changed, but I can’t see the current clown show doing anything progressive like that. They seem more interested in authoritarian crap like blocking websites to prevent kids from seeing adult content even though the effect is to push kids towards using dodgy free proxies and VPNs to get around the law, whilst letting companies gather personal information from adults which will then be leaked.
Or maybe going after people who aren’t on board with the Israel genocide and arresting people for holding signs.
Are laws that only exist because drivers in motor vehicles kill so many folk, really applicable to cyclists.
A very busy junction in Amsterdam was fixed by *removing the traffic lights* – very few cars use it.
The laws that exist to allow pedestrians to cross the road safely are very definitely applicable to cyclists. I couldn’t care less if somebody makes a cheeky left turn on red or goes straight on at a T junction against the light if there are no pedestrians there, unfortunately, in London at least, a lot of the red light jumping involves people going through red lights at pelican crossings and other places where pedestrians have a green light, often swerving in between them on the crossing and even (and this really beggars belief) swearing at them for being in the way. If we could trust all cyclists to behave responsibly and only run reds when it’s sensible and safe to do so I’d say go for it, but there are just as many arseholes on bikes as in cars (and that goes double for people on Lime bikes, I’m afraid) and it’s a certainty that if red light running was allowed in certain circumstances many people would take that to mean it was allowed in all circumstances.
Even if there’s a hundred red light jumping for each phone-using driver (highly doubtful) the driver is still probably more dangerous, so where the focus of attention should be.
…red light jumping **cyclists**…
Oh edit option, why hast thou forsaken us?
And no pictures of squirrels…
I can try
Nice try, but I don’t even seem to be able to reply to your post.
Reply to hawkinspeter
Can you give it a more descriptive url so I can imagine it better?
When you say there’s a massive problem, what exactly has been the result of this problem? Has there been an increase in deaths or injuries?
Well we all know that jumping a red light is breaking the law. If the vast majority of cyclists are doing that I see it as a massive problem. In the same way I see the vast number of throttle powered illegal e-bikes that are also lumped under the “cyclist” label. Certainly it all feeds into the intense dislike motorists seem to have for us because they view us as above the law / thinking we “own the road” (hence the constant complaints about us not having license plates and insurance).
Despite cyclists RLJing and not having license plates and insurance, the number of KSIs are vanishingly small. Even if you include the road-illegal e-motorbikes, there are still very few instances of people getting hurt.
Meanwhile, drivers routinely speed, use their phone, park inconsiderately and block roads and junctions due to their vehicles being so big (despite most of them only containing one person). They have an “intense dislike” of cyclists because they’re buying into the motornormative dream – there’s no point trying to be a “good” cyclist as drivers are not basing their opinions on facts and reality.
Waiting at the red light doesn’t decrease the likelihood that a driver will close pass you or hit you. Probably increases it if there’s no advanced stop line or similar infra.
I always wait at the lights, but only because I like to have a little break now and again.
Reply to bensynnock:
Sometimes it’s safer to go through a red than wait for a green light and then have to battle the left-hookers. Obviously, it depends on the nature of the junction though.
Whataboutery, much? RLJ is illegal. It infuriates me. All this argument about “it doesn’t hurt anyone”, “it makes us safer”. ILLEGAL.
I do not think that word means what you think that it means.
Reply to MDF
Much as I dislike that stupid word, it is being used correctly if it’s in reply to HP’s original comment. Amongst the many desirable features that the site improvement [sic] has removed, the absence of the “replying to” note is quite ridiculous and causing endless confusion.
It’s not, though – HP was directly rebutting the comment they were replying to, which suggested that motorists have a dim view of cyclists because a proportion of them break the law, by pointing out that if that were true then they would also have a dim view of motorists, since a proportion of them also break the law. The mention of motorists’ offences was germane to the point, and therefore not ‘whataboutery’.
@squired RE “Well we all know that jumping a red light is breaking the law. If the vast majority of cyclists are doing that I see it as a massive problem. ”
“If” … I believe there have been some studies suggesting that cyclists are on average no more likely to ride through red than motorists to drive through them.
BUT I can well believe that in certain places many cyclists do. Also motorists doing so tend to be doing it as the lights have recently turned red, while cyclists may have a different pattern (eg. just before the light goes green, or plain ignoring it…) and so stand out.
However … I’m pretty sure there are even more drivers going through on red than cyclists! Simply because far more drivers / driven journeys / people driving for longer). And yet in popular consciousness this doesn’t seem to be a “massive problem”?
Indeed the police seem to be intensely relaxed about it in most places also.
Speeding: in some places the majority of drivers are speeding – which is very much associated with host risks of crashing AND worse outcomes. Yet the biggest outcry about that seems to be for increasing our even getting rid of the speed limits! Or at least removing checks on people speeding eg speed cameras.
In one sense I agree with you (and a nod to the “but why can’t we be trusted to pick our speed” folks): if many are breaking a law that suggests that a) people don’t feel the rules “work” for them and/or b) enforcement and punishments aren’t deterring.
There’s no getting around the danger from eg. motor vehicle drivers speeding etc. – the KSI (and smashed infra…) stats near that out. More enforcement!
But for cyclists, overall it may be cheaper to try a different approach in places:
Making it easier to cycle might reduce numbers of motor vehicles being driven … which can help reduce several “massive problems”!
There are some practical aspects that should be used to adjust assessments of how many cyclists v motorists fail to stop at red lights.
1. Opportunity. If a driver goes through a red light, that’s one; if the next one stops, that stops the others behind. One jumper. If a cyclist stops, the next one can easily filter past. There are fewer practical constraints against red light jumping outside the road user’s control on a bike. So, in particular circumstances, the numbers may be different, but that’s a difference of opportunity, not propensity.
2. Definition. “Going through a red light” conjures up images of a road user passing from one entry point of a junction to another exit point. But the offence is actually failing to comply with traffic signals. That offence is committed when any part of the vehicle passes the relevant line on the road (white line on the road, or an imaginary line perpendicular to the primary signal in the absence of a line) in contravention of the signal.
When a driver could reasonably have stopped on amber but doesn’t, or goes over the line on red, they have committed an offence. Guidance also advises drivers not to enter a cycle box if they can’t clear it within the signal. That means that any driver in a bike box on red has either failed to drive with due care and attention or (just as/more likely, in my anecdotal experience) rolls over the first line on red, stops in the box, and commits the offence of failing to comply with traffic signals. Even if only the front of the car overhangs the line.
3. Conversely, while cyclists may do this, they have an argument of safety to consider, depending on the circumstances. If the front vehicle is large, such as a pick-up truck or HGV, where driver visibility of what is immediately in front of them may be limited; if the car is in the bike box it could be said that it is not safe to remain behind the line and they need to ensure they are clearly visible for their own safety. There is case law to similar effect.
They have made those complaints for decades. The same complaints about road tax. Its just parrotting the bollocks they heard on the daily mail. Cyclist behaviour has fuck all to do with it. If behaviour had any logical bearing on opinions then drivers would be absolutely despised because so many of them are awful and dangerous.
One of the mobile phone users I reported actually moved off without looking as they were putting the mobile phone down. They were partially in a cycle box when I arrived I was wondering whether to stop in front of them as there was still some room but as I passed I noticed the mobile phone and went back to get it on camera. It’s just as well I did as the lights changed as I was pointing the camera and I suspect I would have been hit if I had been in front.
In my report I suggested that if a young child had been crossing in front of the car they would probably have been hit. Points and a fine.
I’m obviously a nasty tell tale.
Why this is funny:
Newsthump is a satirical web site on the internet.
What this item does is combine a common experience most people have online with a stereotype of a particular mode of transport.
The common online experience is ‘Captcha’: having to pass a test to prove they are human by clicking on all the images that obey a certain rule. In this case, the images – often of poor quality to make automated recognition harder – may or may not include traffic lights.
The stereotype is that cyclists are known to go through red lights.
The joke is that, since we all ‘know’ that cyclists go through red lights, they don’t know or recognise traffic lights, so they will find the Captcha test hard.
And that is why it’s funny. Please select a laughing emoji now.
Except, it’s not funny.
It’s based on a false premise. Cyclists are no more likely than other road users to break the rules. We are all road users, and each mode of transport is broadly speaking, representative of society – broadly enough that such differences as there are not differentiated by modes of transport. Except that, if anything, cyclists are slightly less likely to break the rules, everything else being equal. Lots of comedy is based on false premises. Racist jokes, for example. Other jokes targeting other nations (arguably a form of racism). Mother-in-law jokes. Blond jokes. Making fun of “Karens”.
It’s othering. It picks a particular ‘group’ of people – a minority group – to be the butt of the joke. It identifies a group to be the standard ‘out’ group. You don’t need evidence, once you’ve othered the group: you just have a go at them. You can use glib, demeaning terms to refer to them: “lycra-louts” doesn’t need to be justified, you just say it. Their manner on the road is “weaving”, “racing”, “getting in the way”.
It punches down. You’re not attacking a group with a single, powerful mouthpiece. While there are organisations that represent cycling, they do not represent them all. Nor are cyclists typically cycling in order to make a statement: they are just out cycling; exercising their right to use the road. A political group seeks a mouthpiece and criticism of its views and actions is legitimate. A leader should be held publicly accountable with reasoned debate. Cyclists face criticism from the gutter press (see, I’m doing it; but the gutter press – apologies for the tautology – has the right and power of reply), from [usually solo] political comment, from the general public.
It’s just not funny. To be funny, there needs to be a sense of originality. The more times you hear a joke, the less funny it gets (with some exceptions. Morecambe and Wise with Andre Preview never gets old).
But the worst thing of all is that it props up the abuse that many of us have experienced on the roads as we cycle. Not only abuse, but poor-to-dangerous driving that puts us at risk and, all too often, results in injury or death. The abuse we receive – because somebody else who chose the same mode of transport as us happened to get too close/too fast to an elderly relative once – puts our lives at risk. And it’s encouraged by what somebody thinks is funny at our expense. Rape jokes did the same.
And that’s why it’s not funny.
I still don’t know how this guy squeezed between me and the car but it is the speed that he goes through the red light that is worrying.
There is no guarantee that he can see that the way is clear and a small child isn’t crossing…
Is the Armed Cyclist a Trump supporter…?
Cheating will be part of life for ever. How shocking!
Re the filthy drive chain.
It does indeed show a special talent.
During a trip to Sainsbury’s at 8mph, the rider’s power output was probably similar to that of Bradley Wiggins in the 2012 Olympic Time Trial.
The chain looked relatively clean mind….
It looks to me as if the bike was pushed over, gear side down, into a pool of mud. Or perhaps it was something like the horse trails we get in the new forest, where the track is very narrow and worn into the ground, which is also very soft on either side. You have to get off and push because it’s too narrow to ride on but then the derailleur has scraped along the side of the bank and picked up a clump of mud and grass.
Does Kate Hoey also think that drivers with webcams are ‘nasty’?
Really quite disappointed that Beryl Burton’s name isn’t on that list of inspirational female cyclists.
They’re all Londoners or have significant connections with London, I don’t know if that was part of the judging criteria?
London connection would seem reasonable because there are so many female heroes that they’re spoiled for choice, but let’s not miss an opportunity to laud the name of Beryl Burton, or another great: Nicole Cooke. They, especially Burton, came before the tidal wave of worthy names in British female cycling, and can be described as harbingers.
Nice try, but I don’t even seem to be able to reply to your post
ktache has encountered the Reply Level Limit, and I’m not convinced that the new system of reply under the ‘index comment’ is at all as effective as the previous ‘replying to …’ marker
Oh good grief, I’d blissfully forgotten about Kate Hoey AKA Zelda until now
That *Newsthump* thing is actually quite funny
… if your taste in comedy is tired, lazy, and unoriginal.
Of the Santander Bikes honouring women in cycling, im surprised to not see one named after Beryl Burton.
Her legacy and the records she set stood the test of time for decades. Her 12-hour time trial record of 277.25 miles surpassed the mens.
There has never been a more influential or pioneering woman in British cycling history.