Surrey traffic cops call out safe driving campaign spouting "dangerous advice" about riding two abreast; Disgusting scam profiting from NZ cyclist's death exposed; Gold Pinarello; Pro Brexodus?; Froome embraces 'leisure rider' life + more on the live blog

Isn't that one of the Milibands?  I need a photo of him eating a hot dog or something, to be sure...

brooksby wrote:

Isn't that one of the Milibands?  I need a photo of him eating a hot dog or something, to be sure...

I think it's 10Mb Milliband.

(a) I'm sure they're doing both. (b) it's easy to criticise, but engaging with and educating people on social media might have wider reach and more positive impact than simply catching and punishing a small selection of wrong-uns.   

educating people on social media might have wider reach and more positive impact than simply catching and punishing a small selection of wrong-uns

Either of these actions is better than nothing, which is what we have up here. Surrey does seem to be miles better for cyclists than most forces.

See my comment earlier. If only they were "doing both". 

I'm sure if she actually had a team, they probably would!

Would have thought it would be good publicity for Scott to give her a golden bike, whether or not she has a team. Maybe they can't agree what parts to hang off it - I think she had a mix and match approach. 

quiff wrote:

Would have thought it would be good publicity for Scott 

She had one of the Scott custom Olympic paint jobs from squinting at the first image of her winning I could find - my bet would be that a gold ones on the way if she doesnt have it already.   She's probably a Scott Brand Ambassador or similar regardless of her Pro status. 

I think when the rider departed the bike, which is not clearly seen, in falling off he gave the bike a shove sideways. That's all.

Conservation of Momentum. Back wheel is spinning at x rpm and as the brake hadn't been applied to it when he came off it was still spinning. As the bikes are so light and it landed with back wheel touching the floor, spinning momentum then carried on moving the bike until dispersed. 

The camera is moving also, which gives it an odd perspective.  The bike wasn't stationary - it was moving at significant speed forward, then when the wheel hit it started moving forward and to the side.

Given that you cant see the rider in any of that footage and applying Occam's razor I think you're right.

Kendalred wrote:

I have an alternative theory regarding that bike involved in the Tour of Denmark crash...

...IT'S POSSESSED!!!!!

Well obviously; someone owns it.

eburtthebike wrote:

Kendalred wrote:

I have an alternative theory regarding that bike involved in the Tour of Denmark crash...

...IT'S POSSESSED!!!!!

Well obviously; someone owns it.

CAPITALIST!

Surreyrider wrote:

It would be nice if Surrey road cops actually took action when provided with footage of bad driving instead of garnering plaudits from the likes of Road CC. Actually it would be nice if they even acknowledged it. 

Have you had a bad experience?  Would you like to share with the rest of the class?

The account has now been deleted.

As I mentioned when JV had originally posted it, there was also no reason they couldn't have overtaken either on the video. Then it would have shown that cyclists like that can be overtaken and don't "hold up" faster vehicles in the main, that riding two abreast rather then 10 in single file is easier to over take and a demo of going across into the far lane as the best overtake for cars and cyclists involved. 

Instead he decided to use it to troll car drivers, generate divisive responses and to do segments for his shows which just carried on the "fighting".

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

Instead he decided to use it to troll car drivers, generate divisive responses and to do segments for his shows which just carried on the "fighting".

I very much agree - not a fan of Vine, partly because he blocked me for politely disagreeing with him but also because I feel that although he's generally right his tweets etc are 25% about campaigning for cyclists and 75% about keeping Jeremy Vine in the headlines.

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

As I mentioned when JV had originally posted it, there was also no reason they couldn't have overtaken either on the video. Then it would have shown that cyclists like that can be overtaken and don't "hold up" faster vehicles in the main, that riding two abreast rather then 10 in single file is easier to over take and a demo of going across into the far lane as the best overtake for cars and cyclists involved. 

Instead he decided to use it to troll car drivers, generate divisive responses and to do segments for his shows which just carried on the "fighting".

I think it's worth noting that it is the dangerous and/or ill-informed opinionated drivers that are choosing to "fight" rather than accept the facts they are being shown and having explained to them.

But he could have informed them and removed the opinion that cycling like that won't hold up drivers for long, still allows for SAFE overtaking and is easier to do. But instead he actually perpetuates the myth the ill informed opionated and dangerous drivers have by showing a long open road with seemingly plenty of room and time to overtake and bragging he won't bother and good on them. 

I just feel it would have worked better if there were long lines of oncoming cars so not safe to overtake or if he had shown how easy a safe overtake would have been in the circumstances. 

IanMK wrote:

It's funny because those cyclists aren't riding more than 2 abreast, there are no corners in sight and the road is neither narrow nor busy.

so it's a shame that JV described them as 3 or 4 abreast, rather than ovrtaking to show a) these cyclists were in rows of 2 only b) it's really easy to overtake cyclists riding like this.

Point could have been "6 cyclists take up about the same space as a tractor and no harder to overtake", rather than "cyclists should ride 4 abreast to calm traffic"

One would be useful defence of cyclists, the other just looks like trolling.