Shocking Piece of Driving ...
Comments
-
Wow, that's disgusting...........a coldplay video came on after.0
-
Markhewitt - is that you in the clip ?
Pretty much everyone on here agrees that the car driver is an imbecile and that maybe the cyclist isn't riding brilliantly either. Do you really think cyclists can never ride badly ?0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:Briggo wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:
It's an attempt at a joke.
You tried, bless.
Just re-read your earlier post, and apparently the driver was "driven" to do it by what the cyclist did. That's the bit of justification I objected to.
Hope that helps, chuck.
Read the bit before that .. "pure stupidity"
So no, I wasn't condoning the actions of the driver, however I was questioning whether the driver was pushed to act in such a way through frustration of the actions of the cyclist who appears to be acting in a manner to ride a path to block cars.
Always 2 sides to a story, I doubt very much that car driver caught up and instantly drove up the pavement to get past.
The "primary position" excuse is far fetched, he was practically in the middle of the road and started to veer left at the site of the car attempting to undertake at which point it was too late. For someone who we should assume wasn't attempting to block traffic, he took a good stab at it.
Chuck0 -
Briggo wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:Briggo wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:
It's an attempt at a joke.
You tried, bless.
Just re-read your earlier post, and apparently the driver was "driven" to do it by what the cyclist did. That's the bit of justification I objected to.
Hope that helps, chuck.
Read the bit before that .. "pure stupidity"
So no, I wasn't condoning the actions of the driver, however I was questioning whether the driver was pushed to act in such a way through frustration of the actions of the cyclist who appears to be acting in a manner to ride a path to block cars.
Always 2 sides to a story, I doubt very much that car driver caught up and instantly drove up the pavement to get past.
The "primary position" excuse is far fetched, he was practically in the middle of the road and started to veer left at the site of the car attempting to undertake at which point it was too late. For someone who we should assume wasn't attempting to block traffic, he took a good stab at it.
Chuck
Again, "pushed to act in such a way". I can understand frustration building, but the driver was not pushed to act that way, or driven to do it. They decided that was the thing to do rather than going slower than they wanted to until it was safe to pass the slow moving vehicle.0 -
What if the driver in the car is taking a sick child to hospital or something urgent ? It is possible.0
-
These threads pop up every now and again.... There are those among us who like a little spat and enjoy the chance to vent online after a stressful day.
There is another cycling forum which spits this kind of bile-venting stuff out quite regularly....
I quite enjoy posting on here partly because this sort of thing is so rare.
My take on passing and being passed is that it is polite for road users who are causing a queue to pull to one side and allow traffic to pass. Whether that was appropriate in this instance is unclear.
The driving seemed poor at best, but there may have been a mitigating factor of which we do not know.
My advice is that we ought all to be lovely to one another.0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:Again, "pushed to act in such a way". I can understand frustration building, but the driver was not pushed to act that way, or driven to do it. They decided that was the thing to do rather than going slower than they wanted to until it was safe to pass the slow moving vehicle.
Pathetic attempt at trying to make it look like anyone has said it's acceptable behaviour from the driver based on the evidence provided.
We are questioning that is there in fact two sides to the story, simple as that. Jog on.0 -
Briggo wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:Again, "pushed to act in such a way". I can understand frustration building, but the driver was not pushed to act that way, or driven to do it. They decided that was the thing to do rather than going slower than they wanted to until it was safe to pass the slow moving vehicle.
Pathetic attempt at trying to make it look like anyone has said it's acceptable behaviour from the driver based on the evidence provided.
We are questioning that is there in fact two sides to the story, simple as that. Jog on.
You're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I absolutely don't think you condone the driver's behaviour.
We agree that:
1) Perhaps the cyclist wasn't riding courteously.
2) The driver acted like an absolute d!ck.
Where I disagree with you is that 1 caused 2.0 -
KingstonGraham wrote:Briggo wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:Again, "pushed to act in such a way". I can understand frustration building, but the driver was not pushed to act that way, or driven to do it. They decided that was the thing to do rather than going slower than they wanted to until it was safe to pass the slow moving vehicle.
Pathetic attempt at trying to make it look like anyone has said it's acceptable behaviour from the driver based on the evidence provided.
We are questioning that is there in fact two sides to the story, simple as that. Jog on.
You're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I absolutely don't think you condone the driver's behaviour.
We agree that:
1) Perhaps the cyclist wasn't riding courteously.
2) The driver acted like an absolute d!ck.
Where I disagree with you is that 1 caused 2.
If earlier counts of the area are true - and it's not been said if there was an opportunity just around the corner - but if not then it's arguably mitigating circumstances.
Read highway code - 168 and 169
So there you go - obstructing the road is dangerous and if you're slow (7mph is slow) then do not hold up a queue of traffic.Rule 168
Being overtaken. If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass. Never obstruct drivers who wish to pass. Speeding up or driving unpredictably while someone is overtaking you is dangerous. Drop back to maintain a two-second gap if someone overtakes and pulls into the gap in front of you.
Rule 169
Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a large or slow-moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass.
Quite frankly I don't know why you wouldn't pull over - having a car sat on your tail is not very pleasant even when they're being patient ...0 -
It doesn't really matter what the cyclist was doing or whether they were holding people up, it's a separate issue - you can't drive up the pavement... I'm sure the highway code has something to say on that...0
-
cougie wrote:Its just rude to let congestion build up behind - just like tractors pull over to let traffic past - why wouldnt he? I do it in the lanes.
and when was the last time you saw a tractor actually do that ? anectdotally for sure but living near the countryside I encounter them alot from time to time, and not one has pulled over this past year for sure to let cars through, think my record this year was 10miles stuck behind a tractor around harvest time.0 -
Last time i was held up by a tractor he pulled over after a minute or two to let congestion past.
There's never been a time when ive been stuck for ten miles. Maybe you have really annoying farmers?0 -
10 miles stuck behind one tonight, I was 5th car back, was counting the lights behind on the straights, about 20 behind. Guy went past 3 big laybys as well, on a A road.0
-
-
Obviously you don't pull over there but people Who know the roads round there seem to be saying that the rider often holds up traffic.0
-
bianchimoon wrote:
is that irony?KingstonGraham wrote:Briggo wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:How does any of that make it even vaguely excusable for the driver to drive on a pavement on a blind bend?
You should learn to read.
What does that mean?
Yes it is.0 -
mfin wrote:10 miles stuck behind one tonight, I was 5th car back, was counting the lights behind on the straights, about 20 behind. Guy went past 3 big laybys as well, on a A road.
how fast was he going ..... even if he could manage 20mph average, that's 30 minutes you spent doing 20mph .... with not a single place to overtake in 30 mins
That sucks ..... Even in Bristol city I could find a gap in 30 mins to overtake the car in front if I put my mind to it
.. infact that's gonna be my next challenge 
0 -
ShimanoBottomBracket wrote:bianchimoon wrote:
is that irony?KingstonGraham wrote:Briggo wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:How does any of that make it even vaguely excusable for the driver to drive on a pavement on a blind bend?
You should learn to read.
What does that mean?
Yes it is.
I don't see anything like iron in there at all.0 -
Missed this thread. Quite local to me too so I know the road. Clearly the driver is wrong, I did wonder if perhaps there was just room to squeeze through on the inside and that is what they were doing and went up the pavement when the bike moved back but from what we see it does look like the pavement is deliberately used to undertake.
The cyclist isn't covering himself in glory there though. I'd like to see the preceeding few minutes because possibly the driver feels they have had a chance to overtake had the rider been further to the left and has got wound up by that. That doesn't excuse the driver but the cyclist could ride slightly out to give themself some safety space to move into and leave it to the motorist to decide if there is a clear overtake on. Yes you may occasionally get one a little close but then you move in if you feel threatened. Blocking has its place but I can't see the need there and normally it's by riding primary not on the white line. Put it this way - whatever we feel we should be able to do would anyone advise their teenage son or daughter to ride in the position that recumbent is riding - it will make motorists annoyed and they will then put the cyclist at risk which presumably is the opposite of the intention.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0 -
Ok the comments on the clip say he's just moved into "primary" hence his indicator beeping and you can see a car has passed him pulling away. I still think his definition of primary is wrong but a little more understandable. On reflection his riding may fall into the category as correct by the letter of the law but poor in terms of putting himself at unnecessary risk.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0
-
People are missing a rule of the road here and leads me to beleive that the cyclist is also unaware of this rule:
You CAN CROSS double (or a single white on your side) if:
A. If the object in front is travelling at less than 10mph, including stationary vehicles.
B. You are turning right into a junction/property/driveway.
C. It is safe to do so.
Yes the undertake was wrong, but IMO the cyclist (if ignorant of this rule) was positioned incorrectly, as he was preventing any overtaking, or at best allowing overtakes but also endangering himself by being so far over to the right. Personally if it was me, i would be sitting in the middle of the lane.0
