Team Sky drivers to take safety course after close pass of cyclist in Wales

bobinski wrote:

I think Sky should be asked/pressured to reflect on what has happened and to consider using their considerable media clout to run the equivalent of the old public service commercials. They could link up with Chris boardman, who made that wonderful series of videos for British Cycling, and run those/other videos during primetime commercial breaks to alert as may vehicular road users as possible to our right to be on the roads and their legal obligation to comply with the highway code and our Laws and to share those roads safely.  They could run it under a " we all make mistakes and have to learn banner..." I dont mind as long as the word gets out as to what is and is not acceptable/lawful/safe.

Which then becomes yet another of those "awareness" or "share the road" campaigns which are all complete bollocks. The excellent Beyond the Kerb blog by Bez (who posts occasionally on here) is well worth a read for some insights to all those "respect" campaigns - they broadly tender to the default that when a driver thinks share the road, they mean get out of the way and when a cyclist thinks share the road they mean please don't kill me.

http://beyondthekerb.org.uk/

Like it or not, you've got the best deal out of this that you're going to get. The countless thousands of close passes on YouTube, the failed private prosecution of a close pass by Martin Porter QC, the actual outcome of this particular case all show why the driver is not even going to get a caution for this from the Police.

If you want that to change, that's letters to Government, not Sky.

unconstituted wrote:

When you're done waffling, can you tell us how people who want a prosecution for law breaking are a bad as law breakers as you were saying earlier.

+1. Really, asking for some kind of prosecution, and some kind of punishment isn't only a bad thing. But apparently, it's so appaling it's the ethical equivalent of risking peoples lives like this?

kitsunegari wrote:

I think the worrying thing about David Brailsfords response is that it is exactly the same as the one we see in any case when a lawyer is trying to weasle his client out of responsibility; "I've spoken to Claudio myself and we had a chat about it and he is really upset about it."

As if, somehow, the fact that he's upset makes it all ok.

Yeah, I thought he should be sacked. But maybe that's too harsh. But even a short suspension was too much? Come on. He also went on about how hard it is to tell close it actually was before apologizing again. So a couched apology with no further consequences ends up being the end result, when you remove all the spin. Not enough, IMHO. YMMV. 

Also, just looking at it from  a PR standpoint, it seems like that bus driver has had to have accrued some major brownie points to get off with a slap in the wrist for that.

Story made it to the Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/video/2016/sep/08/team-sky-bus-narrowl...

AWPeleton wrote:

Did I name you ? No I didn't but you obviously believed it was directed at yourself hence the reply. Also some of the people on here are no better than those who commit an offence with their holier than thou attitude. Now if you don't like people picking up on your faults or even lies don't post them.

When you're done waffling, can you tell us how people who want a prosecution for law breaking are a bad as law breakers as you were saying earlier.

Then you can get tell us about these 'lies' I've been telling. 

Great stuff this 

Well.. I don't see why Sky get to choose the punishment for dangerous driving. 

freeewheelin wrote:

Well.. I don't see why Sky get to choose the punishment for dangerous driving. 

I don't get that either.  "We've spoken to the driver and he's not going to be allowed chocolate digestives for the next week... only rich tea... and no dunking allowed for the rest of the naughty drivers either.  There,  sorted."

AWPeleton wrote:

Lol, the 2 people i expected to reply did so empathically.

I really enjoy reading your comments it actually makes me think about my job and how lucky iam knowing there are people like yourself out there................ 

Yes, people tend to reply when comments are directed at them on message boards. Incredible prescience, well worth the self-satisfied weirdness 

So when you're done being smug over having average intelligence, can you tell us how people who want a prosecution for law breaking are a bad as law breakers as you were saying earlier.

This outta be great. Don't run off now. 

Critchio wrote:

Good job the tanker driver stopped.

It amazes me that in nearly all cases were there is going to be a likely collision between the offending driver, another innocent driver and a vulnerable cyclist, it's mostly the cyclist that gets hit due to the mentality thats bred into drivers not to hit another vehicle, sod the cyclist. When someone chooses to subconsciously collide with a cyclist rather than another car where the driver is cocooned in a steel shell surrounded by airbags it's shows just deep the negligence goes and a rethink of attitudes at the grass roots level is needed.

That Sky drivers instinct was not hit the tanker, but it would have been ok to knock the cyclist of his bike and probably under the wheels of his truck. That's my point.

Your point is spot-on. I suspect, though, that that is most people's instincts... Find yourself rolling quickly towards a massive tanker or a squishy cyclist, and I'd put fairly hefty money on the vast majority of people veering in the squishy cyclist's direction. And I doubt there's much that can be changed about that.

The behaviour that can be changed is to not get into the situation in the first place. The inherent impatience on the roads on the part of a significant proportion of drivers is an epidemic and kills epidemic numbers of people, and 'the government' (whatever colour) treats it in exactly the same way that they treat most other difficult issues - ignore it and bang on about 'making big decisions'.

crazy-legs wrote:

OK, put it this way.

There are things that the roadcc Baying Pitchfork Mob would like to happen (driver thrown in jail for 100 years, Sky fined £billions, rider showered with free Pinarellos for ever etc)

There are things that SHOULD happen (police investigate, prosecute, charge, courts administer appropriate punishment). And/or Sky sack the driver.

However none of that WILL happen. Various reasons, none of them to do with Sky. Police are underfunded, underresourced, overworked and will give out the usual platitudes of "we're very concerned" and then do fuck all. That's the Police and Government to blame for that one. Rather crucially, the rider (you know, the person who actually experienced this first hand rather than watching it on a video...) has accepted Sky's apology and their promise to re-train not just this driver but all their drivers which makes further prosecution even more unlikely.

If Sky sack the driver, within 10 minutes he'll have a job at one of the other teams - the people who can drive these buses aren't just your average Eddie Stobart driver, they're integral parts of the team and their job goes far above simply "driving a big bus". So Sky lose a key member of staff, he immediately gets a job doing the same thing for another team but, again rather crucially, won't have been re-trained.

I agree the whole road safety laws, everything to do with road crime/punishment needs a complete re-write but this video, if you take out the fact that the bus says SKY down the side is no different to any one of the other millions of close pass videos on YouTube. And I suspect this has got a far better overall response than they ever did.

Complain / campaign for a change in the law, yes. Shout loudly at Sky on social media - probably a waste of time.

Where is this 'Braying Pitchfork mob' on road.cc who wanted the 'driver thrown in jail for 100 years, Sky fined £billions, rider showered with free Pinarellos for ever etc'

Can you quote them for us?

I had a look and at the moment it looks like you've made up an imaginary group of people, saying imaginary things and went on a rant about them. On a Sunday.

Are you alright?

dafyddp wrote:

Calling for the driver to be sacked seems a bit knee-jerk - training for all drivers in the organisation can only be a good thing.

Sky acknowledged the offence, appologied and took positive action. If every company employing coach/lorry/van drivers responded this way whenever one of their employees was reported for close-passes and other poor driving it would be a very positive thing.

I disagree. Endangering another person's life in this manner for the sake of saving a few seconds of travel time should be considered gross misconduct for a professional driver. I believe that overtake should be treated as a criminal offence and sacking people for breaking the law is not uncommon. As Team Sky is closely linked with cycling, it would send a clear message to their other drivers to look out for cyclists and treat them appropriately.

dafyddp wrote:

Calling for the driver to be sacked seems a bit knee-jerk - training for all drivers in the organisation can only be a good thing.

Sky acknowledged the offence, appologied and took positive action. If every company employing coach/lorry/van drivers responded this way whenever one of their employees was reported for close-passes and other poor driving it would be a very positive thing.

for me its about my first reaction to the video, in that I felt it was,and still is, a totally unacceptable piece of driving regardless of whose bus it was, that wasnt acceptable or safe. But Im not getting the feeling from all TeamSky/Brailsford responses to it, that they see it quite the same way and thats what disappoints me

Sure theyve apologised, thats the least the can do, offered some freebies to the rider involved, yeah nice but still missing the elephant in the room AFAIC, and I totally accept the rider is happy with their response and doesnt want to take it further and I dont have a problem with that, I dont want the driver sacked or prosecuted thats just silly imo, I just want to know the driver and all of TeamSkys drivers are left in no doubt that it wasnt an acceptable overtake, and was far below the standard TeamSky expects, or expects to set out on the road.

because if a professional cyclist team cant set the standard for safe overtaking, what hope is there for anyone else getting it ?

their apology just reads like every other companies response to these things. sorry we got caught on camera, extra training for drivers,

Id like to "believe in better" than that.

unconstituted wrote:

The guy's actually a cyclist too.

 

Didn't think my opinion of him could have went any lower. Safety courses can't cure douche.

Ha ha.  Yes, that was the icing on the cake.  

Yorkshie Whippet wrote:

What a load of bolxs!

The drivers sorry his been caught out this time, it's gone straight into the media. The worst case is this his cushy lifestyle is threatened.

As for a safety course, take the drivers to an airfield, make them ride at a steady 10-15mph whilst one of their fellow drivers pass feet inches  away at 60 mph. Quick simple and effective.

Have corrected your post.

Yorkshie Whippet wrote:

What a load of bolxs!

Well the cyclist involved seemed to be happy with the outcome (he tweeted as such) and I'm fairly sure it's a far better outcome than you'd have got from the average bus company or from Tescos.

So if the rider is happy and Team Sky are happy and have acted appropriately, I'm sure the internet hardmen can now stand down?

crazy-legs wrote:

Yorkshie Whippet wrote:

What a load of bolxs!

Well the cyclist involved seemed to be happy with the outcome (he tweeted as such) and I'm fairly sure it's a far better outcome than you'd have got from the average bus company or from Tescos.

So if the rider is happy and Team Sky are happy and have acted appropriately, I'm sure the internet hardmen can now stand down?

Crime and punishment isn't about making a victim 'happy', or something about appeasing 'internet hardmen' (wasn't aware people were asking the driver for a punchup - who knew! ).

Crime is an offense against the state and according to jurisprudence, is supposed to be applied to all citizens. 

Was catching up on the WM Police blog just now and spotted this:

To which they commented: Expect prosecution, not education for anything of this standard !

Maybe the WM Police should stop acting like hardmen though.

unconstituted wrote:

Well the cyclist involved seemed to be happy with the outcome (he tweeted as such) and I'm fairly sure it's a far better outcome than you'd have got from the average bus company or from Tescos.

So if the rider is happy and Team Sky are happy and have acted appropriately, I'm sure the internet hardmen can now stand down?

Crime and punishment isn't about making a victim 'happy', or something about appeasing 'internet hardmen' (wasn't aware people were asking the driver for a punchup - who knew! ).

Crime is an offense against the state and according to jurisprudence, is supposed to be applied to all citizens.

[/quote]

Punishment is society's revenge, and does not change behaviour.  If the driver has been brought to book by his employers, and has changed his driving and will not do it again, what is the point of revenge?