- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Giro 2012 S10 Tractor (Daniele Badolato - LaPresse - RCS Sport)Foul-mouthed anti-cyclist rant from farmers' Facebook group goes viral
A foul-mouthed Facebook post from Farmers Against Misinformation, in which cyclists are asked to stop on country lanes to allow oncoming tractors to pass, has been shared 15,000 times.
The page committed to "helping people understand successful livestock and crop farming practices around the world, by providing news, views, and real world data" posted the "polite-ish notice" on Saturday. It has since been liked 42,000 times and attracted 10,000 comments.
From "an irritated farmer"...
A polite-ish notice to all cyclists on country roads during harvest.
Please understand I have zero issues with you using the roads to ride your bicycle, I’m all for exercising and if slipping in to a lycra suit and impaling your self on a cock-shaped bike seat for hours keeps you satisfied then each to their own.If I’m driving a car I always give plenty of ‘safe space’ when passing cyclists which is only fair, we know how sensitive you are to your requested road space, you have just as much right to the roads as anyone....
HOWEVER, if I’m coming at you in a bloody great big tractor with 20 tons behind me on a single track road, do me and yourself a favour and STOP for one second, either move as far over to your side of the road or just step on to the verge if there is one, so I can pass safely, do not just continue at full speed and then piss and moan as you go past because if it goes wrong you’ll end up being pressure washed off a tractor wheel.
Unfortunately for you we take all your space and we can’t help it, so unless you want to lend a hand either changing a tyre that’s blown out or shovelling up a spillage, then we’re not dropping our wheels into drainage grips so that you can continue your bicycle ride.
Cars, horse riders and runners are capable of it, I seem to be missing something with cyclists, I presume either you don’t want to get your special bike dirty, you’re trying to beat your PB or more than likely you’re just a complete cock in general.
Regards your Road Safety Advocate for the 3 shires
Cycling and farming don't overlap too often, so we've not got too much in the road.cc archives however, last June, a certain Jeremy Clarkson released his new Amazon Prime series 'Clarkson's Farm' in which there's a scene where former Trek-Segafredo pro Charlie Quarterman rides past the now-tractor-based presenter.
Filmed during lockdown, Clarkson says (to his camera operator, also out doing their job): "Everyone's told to stay at home unless their journey's essential. That doesn't apply to cyclists, obviously!"
At least one good thing came from that episode...one follower added: "...not sure what’s more awkward, him owning himself while being a smart-arse as per or the fact he’s pretty much in cardiac arrest putting up a small sign."
Anyway, it seems Farmers Against Misinformation have taken a leaf out of Clarkson's book on this one...
Dan is the road.cc news editor and has spent the past four years writing stories and features, as well as (hopefully) keeping you entertained on the live blog. Having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for the Non-League Paper, Dan joined road.cc in 2020. Come the weekend you'll find him labouring up a hill, probably with a mouth full of jelly babies, or making a bonk-induced trip to a south of England petrol station... in search of more jelly babies.
Latest Comments
- neilmck 0 sec ago
The idea of the leaflet they fill-in as they build the bike is to make sure they do not make a mistake. However if they just fill it in beforehand...
- pockstone 16 min 12 sec ago
The law of unintended consequences applies even to the likes of PD MP....
- essexian 41 min 44 sec ago
BBC News. Its easy to find: sadly.
- RoubaixCube 7 hours 23 min ago
And if you put the Gamel Helmet on back to front. You could become Robocop!
- Oldfatgit 8 hours 33 min ago
On the other hand though ......
- David9694 9 hours 5 min ago
Yeah, this whole thing can really just get to fuck. But that's what we're up against - the normalisation of the plucky chancer driver, the...
- don simon fbpe 10 hours 31 min ago
There are times when I think that these right whinger accounts are left wingers in drag, the aguments they espouse are so ridiculous, or don't...
- Cayo 10 hours 33 min ago
Or any non-drivist. A few years back, I was walking and crossing a side road not far from home. The road has particularly wide corners, especially...
- wtjs 11 hours 18 min ago
This was it in November 2022. Now you see the futility of reporting things to the police or DVLA
- katar_6 11 hours 23 min ago
I'm trying to login at my mobile and it says I need to subscreve. What should I do?
Add new comment
89 comments
That is precisely why I said that OF THEMSELVES, angry words are not sufficient to be a crime, more evidence is needed - because the law knows that angry words that include intentions are often spoken in anger but where the speaker does not in fact have any real intention of committing the act. But according to you, internet forums are awash with criminals doing criminal acts that consist of writing angry words. Yeah right.
Of course you could always start a fundraiser to finance a class action against the claimed perpetrators - since you are so sure a crime had been committed, is bound to be a resounding success.
Oh, there's a much easier way to settle the matter than that, as you're so sure you're right: make an unpleasant threat to kill a prominent figure - the Queen, say - on an online forum, let us know where it is and someone can report it to the police. According to your contention that "angry words are not sufficient to be a crime" you need have nothing to fear and no action will be taken against you.
Ok. I'm planning to kill the Queen.
Done as you requested. Now I'm waiting to be arrested.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jan/18/robin-hood-airport-twitter...
A quip on Twitter by a snowbound traveller has led to his arrest and bailing on suspicion of communicating a bomb hoax.
He later won his appeal (having lost two jobs over it) but he was prosecuted "under section 127(1) of the Communications Act 2003, which prohibits sending "by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character"."
But Jim knows better.
As you say, he won his appeal - 'the appeal against conviction was "allowed on the basis that this 'tweet' did not constitute or include a message of a menacing character" ' although a naive reading of the words out of context would conclude otherwise. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_joke_trial
You were talking about angry words that people meant, not jokes, and claiming that such words alone were not enough to constitute a criminal offence; the fact that, as I quoted below, the Communications Act "prohibits sending by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character" shows that you are mistaken.
FFS, you just can't admit you're wrong can you?
The appeal court, as already referred in previous comments, clarified that the context must be taken into account. A message doesn't have to be only a joke for it not to be taken literally.
The law: "It is a criminal offence to send by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character." No equivocation or additional evidence required. Angry words are sufficient to be a crime, it's written right there in the law and no amount of "FFS" from you can change that I'm afraid. You clearly are unable to admit you're wrong even when the evidence is right there in front of you, and so I'm out.
Clearly you are unaware that it is a function of the higher courts to provide an interpretation of the written laws, and they have decided that the intention of the law is that the context of what is said/written is to be taken into account in applying the law you refer to. And that's why your simply repeating ad nauseum the wording of the law while ignoring the higher courts interpretation is arrant nonsense.
I don't suppose that the repetition of facts will make any difference to your persistent ignoring them, so I'm finished here.
See my reply to Rendel Harris.
.
Like I said, Jim - balance and nuance is not appreciated on this site.
.
.
As you hate this site so much
.
do feel free
.
to take your custom elsewhere.
.
Surely only sad trolls
.
hang around sites where the vast majority
.
disagree with them
.
just to make petty comments
.
about how crap the site is?
.
Balance, Jim - NOT welcome on this site.
.
Unfortunately last year a cyclist in my part of the world was killed in a collision with a tractor, so firstly the the comment relating to pressure washing cyclists off is in really bad taste. Secondly, the cyclist in question did stop to let the tractor past and still ended up being run over.
As it happens the cyclist and the tractor driver knew each other and were neighbours. This is the reality of living in a rural community. The farmers I know around here were as horrified as the cyclists (believe it or not, some farmers also cycle or is that cyclists also farm?!)
I would suggest that all drivers of agricultural vehicles in general, and this one in particular, approach all other road users regardless of their chosen mode of transport as if they were a friend or neighbour.
And the answer to his comment about what is different about cyclists, yes your are missing something. Cyclists are at their least stable at low speed/ whilst stopping, so by maintaininga reasonable speed we are taking steps to minimise the risk of us falling under your wheels. You can take a further step by stopping for a few seconds so that we can pass you.
And of course tractors should be in front of bikes on the list of vehicles that should pay "road tax", have an MOT etc.etc. as they clearly represent a more significant risk to the safety of other road users, particularly as in spite of often weighing as much as an HGV, they are not required to comply with the Construction and Use Regulations which covers issues of visibility, manoeuvrability etc.
To paraphrase...
'Might is right, now get the fcuk out of my way or else....'
hardly 'polit-ish', and behind any attempt to be amusing, there is a pretty dangerous sentiment that needs calling out.
it's akin to those signs on the back of lorries warning cyclists of blind spots. Appreciable on an articulated or large lorry, but now seen all too often on the back of transits and even caddy vans.. come one!
The sign is basically a public disowning of driver responsibility... and I'm sorry but that is bull poo, just as a tractor saying they can't stop or move is utter crap. They are still absolutely required to drive responsibly with due care and consideration of other road users... however inconvenient that may be for them.
It's akin to a dog owner wearing a t-shirt saying 'be warned, the dog's a bit bitey' and thinking that makes it OK for fido to bit a toddlers face off.
This crap made the rounds last year as well, seems an annual late spring faceache misinformation campaign.
It was forwarded onto my local village group I complained and it was taken down.
Farmers don't care about safety in any sense.
The Agriculture industry has more deaths per year than any other industry and in 2020 the most common cause was being struck by a moving vehicle...
https://press.hse.gov.uk/2021/07/19/figures-show-agriculture-remains-the...
So if they have the attitude that deaths occur, don't expect them to move out of your way while they 'go about their business' even though they should.
Kind of... but maybe don't conflate this guy with "all farmers". There is a continuum of "rich farmers owning the countryside and not giving a monkey's" and also "poorly paid people in deprived areas doing dangerous hard work with long hours". Same as not all cyclists are MAMILS / city types out for a jolly and not all are "aggressive and entitled".
We're concerned about the behaviour of course but worth asking why we have these practices (large vehicles, all hours) rather than cheerful yeomen and ploughboys waving at you while taking a break for their scrumpy.
It's not about wealth. Entitlement and aggression are shown across the whole spectrum, both on and away from the public highway.
You surely know how social media works, it's like crowd behaviour - the 'know your place' and 'get out of my way' attitude expressed in the facebook post and the many favourable responses will only further entrench the idea for many that they have priority and it will encourage others to act aggressively.
But the nature of their work does not give them licence to dictate what should happen on public highways. I would advise against extending greater sympathy just because they appear to work long hours driving large vehicles; do we also tell HGV drivers it's OK to be texting, tailgating or falling asleep at the wheel on the motorway? No.
That poster could have communicated far more effectively if they issued a genuine request to all other road users to be aware of agricultural vehicle drivers but the attitude is reminiscent of the farm shop owner bleating about the tour of Cambs road closure last week.
To be clear: I have absolutely NO issue with farmers, contractors and others in the agricultural industry going about their work (and I'm sure my clubmates would agree, some of whom also work in the sector). I always give farm vehicles, milk tankers etc as much consideration and space as I possibly can on narrow roads. It would be nice if more of them gave similar consideration to my safety as well...
Agree - the poster is clearly a Farmer Palmer type. And the main issue is who's bringing the threat and nuisance (e.g. not cyclists) as the type of seat doesn't - mostly - make the asshole above it. Just saying that all of us are fractionally responsible for the businesses and business practices we get - via our own behaviours like living in cities, not wanting to take up rural jobs, wanting to pay less for food, wanting more variety year-round, buying from supermarkets etc.
"Cock shaped bike seat"
I have visions of this farmer fuck. He's sitting down with a bowl of super noodles. Just like Pops (league of gentlemen). Whacking off to a bank of TV monitors as those cock riding cyclists skate past his farmyard.
What another utter cnut...who is this sick fuck?
Mmmmmmmmmm.....
I like it in my assssssssssss.....
Did you get sold a seatpost without the saddle again?
Either there are some very oddly shaped bike saddles out there that I haven't seen or some farmers have very peculiar-shaped John Thomases...
I'm pretty disappointed to hear of farmers moaning about cyclists.
I love cuntryside cycling and it really pisses me off EVERY Autumn when I've got to deal with all the mud, crud and shite farmers leave behind on our beloved country roads - after they've pulled in the harvest. All the crud cakes into the road - for months.
So. Go on farmers. Keep on moaning. You're not on your own.... Selfish forks.
I first read this several months ago, presumably just been bubbling away and now hit the headlines.
I fell the same as most with this vile drivel.
The one that is rarely commented on though is "Unfortunately for you we take all your space and we can’t help it" - and I would disagree, you can help it, the farming industry has chosen to get tractors that are bigger and bigger over the last 20 years.
Oddly enough, when I was last in the industrial countryside in southern Scotland, bimbling along some lanes with my elder brother and elder son on our bikes, the farmers in their tractors slowed down as we came towards them and gave us enough space and a nod as we passed. I know a couple were my brother's neighbours but they weren't all. The ones that overtook us were similarly careful and got a friendly wave (yes, really) each time from us for being considerate. Ditto the van drivers and truck drivers and even the Audi/BMW drivers too. I'm curious what it is that allows those borders Scottish farmers and assorted drivers and cyclists to be able to get along without friction.
Ditto the van drivers and truck drivers and even the Audi/BMW drivers too
Southern Scotland is Shangri-La for cyclists! Things are different in North Lancashire. Tractor Psycho-drivers around here are just as bad as Audi/ BMW drivers and SUV-Mummies- they do not slow one iota for cyclists, and will head straight for you. One minor consolation is that they don't slow for oncoming cars either, secure in the knowledge that the massive wheels and trailers would just crush anything Transit size and below.
Not all Southern Scotland - here's a reminder:
https://road.cc/content/news/249011-tour-o-borders-organiser-says-decision-drop-charges-against-stick-gate-farmers
Pages