OT ..Not a rant..

Are you into fishing?

I take your point, in some places the towpath is very narrow and it's not really appropriate for cycling. However, in many places it's not a problem, I often cycle the Trent and Mersey canal near Burton where the path is wide and great for cycling at the moment (being very dry, not so good in the winter).

NCN Route 63 follows an old railway for several miles near me and is mostly used by dog walkers, but the only incident of note I've had on there was with a young woman jogger who refused to keep left and came to a stop right in front of me (I'd also stopped) and proceeded to lecture me. I pointed out to her that in this country you should keep left which didn't impress her at all.

 

Back to the owd codgers on bikes thread
My story from this morning’s drive to work
Coming up to the bit in Brampton from Wentworth side up to the bulls head roundabout
Where the left hand side of the road has cars all the way up it so difficult to get through at best of times, scene set.

Come across 2 said owd codgers happily at the back of them as nowhere to overtake.
They then turn left into the estate as do I
One is now 30 yards in front of other both riding in middle of lane
Nowhere to pass so stuck at back of them all the way through
Both oblivious to what’s going on around them.

The new highway code sez I must leave them 1.5m and they could be 2 abreast
Therefore tha cant overtake a cyclist almost anywhere
Where dust tha go from theeer.

 

Cheers, Tekky!

You don’t have to stop being you of course, but you could consciously make an effort to post other content from time to time, just to balance it out a bit. Or read posts back before hitting post and reword it slightly in a less antagonist way. I do it all the time as I recognise the same trait in myself. Just writing it out helps, I don’t have to then post it. If people could see the unedited, undeleted original responses I type out they wouldn’t recognise me. Yesterday’s posts were kind of in the middle.

Don’t feel like you can’t contribute to the threads. I hardly ever post detailed, tactical comments even after watching the matches in person so I can see why you might not want to do so from abroad. You can still join in general discussions about the team or match or share football news others may have missed. You’re more than happy to comment on UK news and give strong opinions on the mood of the country without being here to witness it, so I don’t know why you feel you can’t do that about football.

 

Not wanting to rake over old ground but... given the above reply to me from yourself, on a different current thread which you are also contributing , (stewarding), I note the following post which was aimed at Red 24/7

SuperTyke, post: 2998126, member: 6792"]I'm not surprised that you're too thick to understand judging by your neanderthal education levels"

You picked me up for 'talking down to people' but let that one from Supertyke go without a whimper (not only talking down but being directly insulting something he does frequently). My threshold when posting is 'would I be prepared to say what I typed to soemone if face to face?'. Not sure Supertyke has yet to adopt that position.

Not aiming at you but some people on here remind me of EFL refs given how inconsistent they are when calling people out on this BB.

 

I was hardly going to stick up for the person he posted that to when that poster was in the middle of insulting me, was I?

 

Ah! so long as they are on your side anything is fine eh ! That is why some on here think there are cliques. Why do you need 'sticking up for' I am sure you , being articulate, are more than capable of 'holding your own'?

It has to be said, on occasions, this argument that someone recently put forward of people, of 'piling on' to defend someone who is more than capable of defending themselves gains traction. It is also a reason why some thread are so long.

 

I didn’t need ‘sticking up for’, I said I wasn’t going to stick up for someone who was insulting me at the time. Honestly, who would? I’m sure the poster was ‘more than capable of defending themselves’.

 

Erm I wasn't sticking up for her. I was telling someone who thinks that catcalling women is ok and that a woman having an only fans means she is fair game for anything that he's a neanderthal. Unless jamdrop has changed careers again then I don't think I was sticking up for her

 

It's illegal to( higway code rule 64) ride a bicycle on a pavement, I don't know about a pedestrianised area though

 

Most cyclists I come across on my daily walks are pretty considerate, I always walk on the edge of any path I know I might encounter them and look behind me before changing direction or stepping across a path. Having said that I do think they should be subject to the same sentencing regime as other road users if they kill or injure people while cycling recklessly.
https://amp.theguardian.com/lifeand...jailed-for-18-months-over-death-of-pedestrian

18 months for killing someone? Ridiculous.

 

Handbags.

This thread is like being in a snug full of Nora Battys after they’ve had one too many port & lemons. Calm down ladies.

 

Patience is a virtue.

 

You have to admit though the new rules are a joke.
If I can't pass a cyclist without leaving a ridiculous amount of room then why can a cyclist pass me a few inches from my mirror?

 

The new rules are not a joke at all, have you ever been on a bike and passed by a car doing 50+ mph as close as a few inches? Not very nice.
1.5m is not a ridiculous amount of room at all. The vast majority of motorists are quite happy to comply with this and only a few idiots don't. I suspect any cyclist passing with a few inches of your mirror are doing so when your car was stationary, a bit of difference there mate. I'm sorry the two old lads on bikes held you up but I find that drivers hold me up (on my bike) more, for example overtaking just before a junction or lights then stopping in such a way that they block me from filtering (which is perfectly legal by the way).

We all need to calm down a bit and be more considerate to other road users instead of falling into the Top Gear/Daily Mail mentality of road wars.

 

In a former life as a driving instructor I, as standard practise, taught when passing parked cars, a) check if you can see if there are any occupants in the car or any pedestrians , especially children in the vicinity of the vehicle b) leave at least a car doors width but if not possible due to road width and/or oncoming traffic, slow down and pass with extreme caution. Regarding bikes and horses, stationary or moving, give at least twice that much space and with horses always slow down as they can be unpredictable.
I have not read the exact wording of the new rules regarding bikes but would consider having to leave more than 5 feet clearance if a rider is stationary at the kerb edge excessive as on some narrow roads it could disrupt traffic flow if you have to slow to a halt because you cannot leave 5 ft. Cyclists should reciprocate and leave a doors width clearance to stationary cars parked at the side of the road (exc traffic queues) Injuries/damage cause by someone opening a door without checking Drivers side incidents are largely the responsibility of the person opening the door but contributory negligence reduces any damages for an injured party as they should leave clearance when passing. On the nearside the person opening the door without checking who then and injures a pedestrian, IMO would be almost entirely to blame.

Motor cyclists/moped riders should be treated like cars, and in fact they should ride at at least 3 or four feet away from the kerb, although some moped riders tend to keep well to the left which is an invitation from some drivers to cut them up. I am not sure that change in teh law was totally necessary because the ' driving without reasonable consideration for other road users' rules would cover it as would, in extreme cases ' driving without due care and attention'. Given the state of many roads, 2 wheeled vehicles are far more vulnerable to pot holes and bumps that can cause riders to be more unpredictable.

 

Can't argue with any of that, the trouble is most drivers would - the worst offenders being old gits of about my age (66) who think they are perfect drivers because they've been driving (badly) for 40-odd years.
Personally, I ride about 1m from the road edge, it's not great to be riding over drains etc for a start and being in that position, it gives me somewhere to go if a moron decides to squeeze past. Also, when I get a queue of cars behind me, I often go onto the pavement to let them past before rejoining the road. This is of course strictly illegal but the alternative often leads to idiots losing their patience.

As I said before, we need to de-escalate these road wars for everyone's benefit.

 

So earlier in this thread, you posted the following:
"News media like The Mail or The Express like to characterise such things as "normal (car driving) people" vs "weird lycra clad yobs" when in truth there are bad drivers and bad cyclists.".
But now it's ok for you to single out older drivers....not. Ageism just isn't acceptable in my book

 

Is it correct that cyclists are now encouraged to ride side-by-side in tandem?

 

I'm only reporting what I've seen with my own eyes. I'm sorry if the words "old gits" offended you, they were not meant to be offensive and I clearly applied them to myself.

 

I don't think so, the HC says you should not ride more than 2 abreast, it has done for decades.

Edit, here is rule 66 which HAS changed. It now says riding 2 abreast might be better when riding in large groups.

Rule 66
You should

• avoid any actions that could reduce your control of your cycle
• be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in groups. You can ride two abreast and it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders. Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so
• not ride close behind another vehicle in case it stops suddenly
• not carry anything which will affect your balance or may get tangled up with your wheels or chain
• be considerate of other road users, particularly blind and partially sighted pedestrians, and horse riders (see Rule H1). Let them know you are there when necessary, for example, by calling out or ringing your bell if you have one. It is recommended that a bell be fitted.

It's worth remembering that the wording of the HC is important; a rule which says "must" is enforced by law whereas "should" is merely advice.