- 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
Video: Driver enraged by cyclist riding in middle of lane
How would you describe the cyclist’s reaction to this driver’s tirade? Perplexed exasperation? Irritated astonishment?
The clip begins with the cyclist, YouTube user steppenjiff, in the middle of the lane as he passes a dog and its owner on the pavement.
A motorist goes past and when steppenjiff inevitably catches up with him at the next set of lights, the driver is positively enraged that he didn’t arrive at the exact same queue a fraction of a second earlier.
“You're in t’middle o’t road,” he says.
“No, I’m in the middle of the lane,” replies the cyclist.
“No you’re not. You’re in the middle of a fucking road,” says the driver, getting angrier. “Get over.”
“No.”
“Yes.”
“Why do I have to get over?” asks the cyclist. “Where does it say that in the law? In the Road Traffic Act?”
“Are you not reading your fucking cycling licence?” asks the driver. He then issues a Danny Dyer-esque sign-off “Twat!” as he drives away.
“I don’t need a cycling licence,” says the cyclist in utter confusion. “What are you on about?”
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- chrisonabike 1 sec ago
And what it did find time for:...
- chrisonabike 12 min 8 sec ago
Everyone probably does it occasionally just because it's so pervasive (presumably from age-old media strictures to avoid saying something that...
- IanEdward 13 min 6 sec ago
This looks quite nice actually, but I always appreciate a perfectly 'straight down' view of saddles in reviews so I can see the shape in plan, I...
- wycombewheeler 17 min ago
Often the lights do not give cyclists enough time anyway. So If you were to wait for green then go immediately, chances are that you would meet a...
- chrisonabike 19 min 28 sec ago
Nothing worse than going for a ride and getting interrupted by a phone call!...
- open_roads 25 min 43 sec ago
Just the usual word salad from the police....
- Hirsute 2 hours 16 min ago
I'd take it to the local recycling centre aka the tip. you don't want to put it in household rubbish in case of fire.
- Tom_77 3 hours 2 min ago
30,000 is the figure for Killed or Seriously Injured. In 2022 there were 1,711 fatalities.
Add new comment
51 comments
But the entitled twattery of drivers is a constant and a given. The problem with vehicular cycling is it pretends that doesn't exist. Cycling 'as if you were a car' runs into the problem that too many dirvers react with sentiment this driver expressed above.
I'm not arguing against existing cyclists making the best of it with vehicular cycling techniques, I'm arguing against the cult-like atittude of the likes of Forrester that says vehicular cycling is the one true solution. It just doesn't work all that well, becaue of the twat-factor. Any proposed solution to anything has to allow for the twat-factor.
But the entitled twattery of drivers is a constant and a given. The problem with vehicular cycling is it pretends that doesn't exist. Cycling 'as if you were a car' runs into the problem that too many dirvers react with sentiment this driver expressed above.
I'm not arguing against existing cyclists making the best of it with vehicular cycling techniques, I'm arguing against the cult-like atittude of the likes of Forrester that says vehicular cycling is the one true solution. It just doesn't work all that well, becaue of the twat-factor. Any proposed solution to anything has to allow for the twat-factor.
[/quote]
People, and drivers, can and do change. We need to change the societal assumption that cyclists are not valid road users and merely impede motor vehicles. Accepting that we aren't proper road users, and that drivers cannot be changed is an admission of defeat.
The safety of cyclists in Holland etc isn't just due to segregated facilities, it is due to the prevailing societal view that they are proper road users and are treated as such by drivers.
For the avoidance of doubt, I totally support segregated facilities, but we need both them and respect from drivers.
The driver's just annoyed the cyclist caught up with him and he's using any excuse to have a go. Regarding narrow pavements to the side of roads, both drivers and cyclists need to be aware of pedestrians. Both dogs and young children could accidentally step into the road. The cyclist acted exactly as he should have.
I don't have a cycling license, but I do have a driving license and when I tried reading it, all it told me was my own name and address. Maybe these fictional cycling license things are different.
What percentage of drivers will have actually been taught that cyclists may need to ride in the middle of the lane?
Is it even in the driving test at the moment?
Teaching this to cyclists but not drivers seems to be a recipe for conflict and anger.
He'd obviously had a very very bad day, a clear road and nothing coming the other way, so a clean and easy pass. Either that or fed up with driving a crap car
I think most car drivers so very rarley overtabke anything on a single carraigeway road they have no idea how to do it correclty. The cyclist in this footage was riding very sinsibly and defensivley. The clear road means he didn't impead the car drivers progress in anyway.
"defensive position because of the off leash dog"
Rule 56
Dogs. Do not let a dog out on the road on its own. Keep it on a short lead when walking on the pavement, road or path shared with cyclists or horse riders.
Yet despite the advice and instruction from the highway code people still walk these cylcist endangering monsters either off lead or on big extending trip wires and rarely get criticised for it
However Joe public continually cricise us on bikes even though we are following the code just no doing what they wish the code days
It is simply not possible to tackle that amount of stupid in a roadside chat.
Angry, stupid, and a shit driver. The OP should be contacting his local police force and demanding they go and speak to the clueless dangerous bastard about his ignorance of driving laws.
Did the driver cut in too soon? Looked like it. And what did the driver say first off "....after me again"?
It looked like a deliberate cut in to me, and likewise perplexed about the "....after me again." comment. Suspect driver may have a slight chip on shoulder.
Yup he cut in closely - deliberately - I then raised my arm in a "wtf" motion - you can see him brake when I do - he's watching me in his rear-view. Then when I catch up he says something like "Raise your hands at me again..."
The rider doesn't need to explain his positioning, he's entitled to be there, but I suggest the good reason for moving away from the pavement at that point is that he is passing a person and a dog which may not be on a lead. It's very sensible to allow a bit of extra space.
on that road that the driver would have had to change to the oncoming lane to safely pass irrespective of the cyclist taking a defensive position because of the off leash dog....no oncoming traffic, no problem and the driver only scrubbed speed to cut back in front of the cyclist to somehow prove what a tricky pass it had been
Has a go about fictional cycling license, then turns left without indicating
Indicator was on. Cancels itself as he drives off.
It's scary that these people are allowed to vote. Might explain the shit-show we are currently embroiled in.
Worse, who gave him his "f*cking driving licence" (Just so he's aware to what I am referring)
Basic English escapes these morons . . Road, Lane ? Not the same thing.
If the lights hadn't changed he was JUST ABOUT to complain about the cyclist not having paid his road tax
Hit the nail on the head, exactly!
I fail to see any positivity for us as cyclists, this is a great example of the sort of moronic attitude that seems to be amplifying at the moment.
Poor choice of analogy. - I can probably guess what your agenda is.
If you have evidence of behavior that is Threatening, Intimidating and you are in fear - take that information to the police and ask them to review it under The Public Order Act 1986.
No need for them to find a traffic officer. The law is quite clear. No excuses for 'Sorry guv I had too much to drink etc etc.'
I am a happily a Motorist, Cyclist, and Pedestrian but being human I do make mistakes.
May I just say Let (she/he/enter your preferred pronoun) who is without sin cast the first stone.
If you make a mistake put your hand up. Get on with trying to make a better place, instead of measuring your entitlement.
Pages