Oops - Own Goal??

Wirral_paul

Well - i'm gobsmacked!!

http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/bikeradar-slammed-for-supporting-campaign-that-would-suppress-cycling/013522

Lets see how long this thread takes to get "moderated"

EdgarAllenPoe

Thats disgusting. Bikesradar deserve all they get on this. Shame.

Wirral_paul

Well it appears BR realises they screwed up (too late!!). Talk about ill-advised!!

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/gary-lineker-and-bikeradar-back-road-safety-campaign-35017/

One mate locally has cancelled his Cycling+ subscription, and I am too!! Totally disgusted with them!

Edit: Just found the following!!

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/sharetheroaduk-bikeradars-response-35028/

A nicely worded climbdown it seems - whether from the backlash seen all over Twitter etc, or from a genuine misunderstanding of the campaign?

ben@31

Bike radar has wrote such bizarre things, like missing out obvious contenders in "best road bikes under £1000" . It makes you wonder has some money in a little brown envelope changed hands to influence the writer?

EdgarAllenPoe

Its not just BR, manufacturers paying for reviews is pretty much ubiquitous across all sports/hobbies.

DavidJB

Yawn! BR Obviously provided support and the insurance company added in their own agenda...(Fair enough they should have proof read the article) When BR realised the mistake they withdrew support. Now all you drama queens can go back to crying because someone on a bike didn't wave back at you.

charlie_potatoes

DavidJB wrote:

Yawn!

Ooh! Someones tired

ilm_zero7

Don't see much wrong with this statement


"Mandatory cycle safety should be included in the national curriculum for both primary and secondary schools to help promote co-operation and tolerance between the motorists and cyclists of the future. Mandatory cycle safety elements should be included in the driving theory and practical test. Compulsory training and testing for cyclists before they take to the road."

slowbike

ILM Zero7 wrote:

Don't see much wrong with this statement


"Mandatory cycle safety should be included in the national curriculum for both primary and secondary schools to help promote co-operation and tolerance between the motorists and cyclists of the future. Mandatory cycle safety elements should be included in the driving theory and practical test. Compulsory training and testing for cyclists before they take to the road."

^^ the bit in bold ...

Compulsory training - how are you going to ensure everyone has completed that - certificates ... fine ..
Compulsory testing - how are you going to ensure everyone has passed - oh - that'll be a license then ...

So suddenly we have cycle licenses being required before you're allowed to cycle on the road ...
But we're not allowed to cycle on the path - so effectively there will be a ban on cycling for those who cannot afford or justify the additional cost of the lessons & test.
What age will this be brought in at ? 17 like the driving license? Ok - so all your paperboys - usually early teans - cannot ride their bikes ... any kids - banned from the roads ...

Why? What is this going to achieve - those riders who RLJ or cut through traffic are already flouting the Highway code - and I would hazard a guess that they're also licensed car drivers, so should know the law ... will they stop breaking the law? I doubt it ...
I'll bet that there is a greater %age of car drivers regularly breaking the law whilst driving than there is cyclists ...

grechzoo

yeah they snuck that sentence in the end to try and get away with it, trying to blind the reader with the very sensible prargraph preceeding it.

seems that technique is effective on some people

seanorawe

I dont agree with making us take a test to ride. But I do however think there needs to be some sort of system to ensure people have read and are competent at putting the highway code in to practice. Filter lights being a big example. How many people have you saw turning right and causing oncoming traffic to emergency stop, because they saw a green light in a filter zone?

slowbike

seanorawe wrote:

How many people have you saw turning right and causing oncoming traffic to emergency stop, because they saw a green light in a filter zone?

None - either on bike or in car

seanorawe wrote:

I dont agree with making us take a test to ride. But I do however think there needs to be some sort of system to ensure people have read and are competent at putting the highway code in to practice.

I don't agree with a test to ride, but we need a test ... ??

How many law breaking cyclists have a driving licence? They've passed that, but choose to "forget" or ignore what they've been taught when they're on a bike ...

I agree that cycling should be taught in school - and when I was young we had to pass our cycling proficiency test before being allowed to use the cycleshed - next lot of more formal education was learning to drive a car ... but I already knew the majority of the highway code - why? Because I'd watched other people using the road and learnt (the good bits) from them...

So, In cycling education, do they need to know that they can't turn right on a green left filter - yes of course they do ... but does it have to be spelt out noddy fashion? Isn't it obvious - a green arrow pointing to the left ... means you can go left ... simple ... do you know anyone who cannot correctly interpret that?
Anyone that goes right on a green left filter has either failed to observe the light properly or believes they have the right to ignore the lights anyway ...

Frank the tank

You should be made to ride a bike on busy roads as part of acquiring and retaining a driving license.

seanorawe

Slowbike wrote:

seanorawe wrote:

How many people have you saw turning right and causing oncoming traffic to emergency stop, because they saw a green light in a filter zone?

None - either on bike or in car

seanorawe wrote:

I dont agree with making us take a test to ride. But I do however think there needs to be some sort of system to ensure people have read and are competent at putting the highway code in to practice.

I don't agree with a test to ride, but we need a test ... ??

How many law breaking cyclists have a driving licence? They've passed that, but choose to "forget" or ignore what they've been taught when they're on a bike ...

I agree that cycling should be taught in school - and when I was young we had to pass our cycling proficiency test before being allowed to use the cycleshed - next lot of more formal education was learning to drive a car ... but I already knew the majority of the highway code - why? Because I'd watched other people using the road and learnt (the good bits) from them...

So, In cycling education, do they need to know that they can't turn right on a green left filter - yes of course they do ... but does it have to be spelt out noddy fashion? Isn't it obvious - a green arrow pointing to the left ... means you can go left ... simple ... do you know anyone who cannot correctly interpret that?
Anyone that goes right on a green left filter has either failed to observe the light properly or believes they have the right to ignore the lights anyway ...

Sorry, reading that back it did not make much sense

What I tried to mention but didnt, is the lights that don't have a filter light, yet you have to wait in the box until clear. I have seen countless cyclists just go once they see green.

Also, about taking a test? I never mentioned taking a test. I meant everyone should read the highway code and read up on road cycling ettiquette. I know that would be impossible to record and police but it would be nice

slowbike

Ok - I think you're talking about box junctions with the entry to which being controlled by lights ... ?

iirc, you're not supposed to enter a box junction until your exit is clear ... even in a car this is often impossible to comply with - you'd just not get anywhere - ever!

As for testing -

Also, about taking a test? I never mentioned taking a test. I meant everyone should read the highway code and read up on road cycling ettiquette. I know that would be impossible to record and police but it would be nice

I agree that everyone who independently* rides on a road should know the rules of the road - to a level suitable for the roads they're riding on anyway ...
but
How are you going to ensure everyone has read the highway code and understood it to a suitable level? That's what tests do ... they test your knowledge and understanding of a subject.

* I said independently as how else does a rider get experience of riding on a road? Under supervision of someone who is experienced the inexperienced rider will gain knowledge and understanding of the road.

t.m.h.n.e.t

Would there be anything wrong with an LBS conducting some short,relatively informal knowledge test to a prospective buyer? They already do the "here are the gears and brakes" chatter, why not a friendly note on safe road use? They IMO would be the best placed people to teach/inform.

It wouldn't stop a vehicular licence holder from running a red or riding on the footpath but going beyond the legally required bell/reflectors at point of sale, could be a good thing?

Doing this would also allow some form of marking system? ie #666999102 could easily be a scannable number relating to an individual and his/her cycle. Data-tag/Alphadot/Smartwater type stuff?

These miniscule dots can store a lot of info inc(but not limited to) addresses, blood types, serial numbers,medical conditions. And the best part is, Police forces already have the equipment to scan them. Anti-theft security and the riders details all in one small dot you'd never see? If I was of RLJ persuasion I would probably think very hard about my actions knowing that my identity is basically an irremovable dot on the bike I ride.

The problem then is the policing levels to bring the offenders up for it


I could also be talking sh1t, I dunno

slowbike

T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:

Would there be anything wrong with an LBS conducting some short,relatively informal knowledge test to a prospective buyer? They already do the "here are the gears and brakes" chatter, why not a friendly note on safe road use? They IMO would be the best placed people to teach/inform.

Only of use if the prospective buyer is there buying the bike ...

and of course, it c/would hit the sales of second hand bikes ...

especially if you want to mark the frame with the identity credentials of the owner!

t.m.h.n.e.t

Slowbike wrote:

T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:

Would there be anything wrong with an LBS conducting some short,relatively informal knowledge test to a prospective buyer? They already do the "here are the gears and brakes" chatter, why not a friendly note on safe road use? They IMO would be the best placed people to teach/inform.

Only of use if the prospective buyer is there buying the bike ...

and of course, it c/would hit the sales of second hand bikes ...

especially if you want to mark the frame with the identity credentials of the owner!

Good points The information held on the tagging can be changed though.

seanorawe

Slowbike wrote:

Ok - I think you're talking about box junctions with the entry to which being controlled by lights ... ?

iirc, you're not supposed to enter a box junction until your exit is clear ... even in a car this is often impossible to comply with - you'd just not get anywhere - ever!

As for testing -

Also, about taking a test? I never mentioned taking a test. I meant everyone should read the highway code and read up on road cycling ettiquette. I know that would be impossible to record and police but it would be nice

I agree that everyone who independently* rides on a road should know the rules of the road - to a level suitable for the roads they're riding on anyway ...
but
How are you going to ensure everyone has read the highway code and understood it to a suitable level? That's what tests do ... they test your knowledge and understanding of a subject.

* I said independently as how else does a rider get experience of riding on a road? Under supervision of someone who is experienced the inexperienced rider will gain knowledge and understanding of the road.

Some filter also go green and you are to wait at the required line for your arrow to let you go. I would not have known the rules for this before I learned how to drive. (started cycling after I passed my driving test)

slowbike

T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:

Good points The information held on the tagging can be changed though.

What if I borrow a mates bike?

slowbike

seanorawe wrote:

Some filter also go green and you are to wait at the required line for your arrow to let you go. I would not have known the rules for this before I learned how to drive. (started cycling after I passed my driving test)

Some junctions are a complete confusion for experienced drivers ... let alone cyclists with no driving experience!

JamesB5446

T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:

I could also be talking sh1t, I dunno

Fully agree.

mamba80

Why is it an own goal? whats wrong with some sort of competency test b4 being allowed out on some of the busiest roads in Europe, with some of the most bike averse drivers as well?
would we all be up in arms if the driving test included some sort of comprehensive strict cycle awareness element? (which is something BC - or another body - could negotiate with, in return for a well thought out competency test)
My daughter has been lucky enough to do BikeAbility, several track sessions at Newport and some GoRide and GoRace coaching, her bike handling skills are way above her non-trained up friends and tbh would put most of us to shame - ok no test is going to mimic that lot but it goes to show that experience can be taught.
How many of us bemoan the lack of riding skills, shown on our roads nowhere days as so few riders go through a trad club like i (and many on this forum) were lucky enough to?

Its going to happen, not compulsory, yet.... but like cycle insurance, its going to come whether you like it or not.

cookdn

mamba80 wrote:

Why is it an own goal? whats wrong with some sort of competency test b4 being allowed out on some of the busiest roads in Europe, with some of the most bike averse drivers as well?

What fix problem at the symptom rather than source? Compulsory testing for cyclists is not going to fix the majority of the SMIDSY collisions caused by motorists (claimed or otherwise). Defensive cycling only goes so far.

Plenty of room for both motorists and cyclists on UK roads. Realigning the perception and attitudes of non-cycling motorists would have the biggest impact. How about a national government sponsored 'Think Cycle' campaign for cyclists along the lines of the 'Think Bike' campaign for motorcyclists as a start?

Best regards
David