Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the lack of certainty surrounding the race for much of 2024, not all of the biggest teams in the women’s peloton will be travelling across the Channel next week to race the inaugural edition of the revamped Tour of Britain Women.
Of the Women’s World Tour’s 15 teams, only SD Worx, DSM-Firmenich, Liv AlUla Jayco, and Human Powered Health will represent the sport’s highest level at the four-day successor to the dearly departed Women’s Tour.
> “I feel a real responsibility to get this right”: Former Ineos manager Rod Ellingworth named as new Tour of Britain race director
But that doesn’t mean next Thursday’s start line in Welshpool will be missing some of the UK’s biggest cycling names.
Because, in welcome news for fans across the country, British Cycling has this afternoon confirmed that a six-strong Great Britain Cycling Team will race the renamed Tour’s first edition, led by former world champion and double Women’s Tour winner Lizzie Deignan.
Deignan will be joined by her Lidl-Trek teammate Elynor Bäckstedt, while Bäckstedt will enjoy the opening two stages on home turf alongside her fellow Welsh rider and Olympic gold medallist Elinor Barker (Uno-X Mobility).
Visma-Lease a Bike’s Anna Henderson, who’s endured a tough, injury-prone 2024, will make her comeback from a broken collarbone at the Vuelta in GB colours, and will surely fancy her chances for a stage win.
(Cor Vos/SWpix.com)
Fenix-Deceuninck duo Millie Couzens and Flora Perkins round out what is a very strong national squad.
“It’s always incredibly special to race on home soil where the energy and support from the crowds is unparalleled. For me personally, I am particularly excited that two of the stages will be hosted in Wales on some iconic roads, which will undoubtedly make for a challenging and competitive race,” Barker said after the team was announced.
“The Lloyds Bank Tour of Britain Women comes at an important time in our preparations for a huge summer of cycling. I think I speak for the whole squad when I say we’re extremely motivated to put on a brilliant show in June – we can’t wait.”
British Cycling’s Performance Director, Stephen Park, added: “We know that the team will relish the rare opportunity to race at home, and for the Paris hopefuls among the squad, the event will play a crucial role in the final preparations for the Games.
“We know that they’ll add real strength and stardust to the race and expect fans will be out in force to show their support.”
Add new comment
48 comments
Hypocrisy from a politician.... I don't believe it!!!
All road users are equal but some are more equal than others?
Four wheels are better than two....
On the subject of educational animations, maybe they can do one to remind pedestrians to check for ALL approaching vehicles and it is safe, before crossing the road???
Wait wait I missed:
Now that's a campaign group noting that rather than TfL themselves... but this is one of those "still mindblowing in the UK" ideas we'll want to get ahold of. Assuming that is we care for any change other than "default party colour was blue, now red, and we nationalised the railways ... well, sort of"
Obligatory View From The Cyclepath "Roadworks vs. the Dutch Cyclist" playlist showing how to do it.
Caption for the IDS photo :-
"I've dried my eyelashes but it's not going to be much use for my the rest of my hair."
I got the following back from IPSO regarding my complaint about the telegrapgh article :-
Dear XXXXXXXXXXX,
I am writing to you regarding your complaint about an article headlined, “52mph
in a 20mph zone...Lycra lout cyclists are creating death traps all over
Britain” published by The Daily Telegraph on 17 May 2024.
IPSO has received over 90 complaints about the article, and it has taken some
time to process the necessary information.
As we have received multiple complaints about the article, IPSO will now
compile a summary of all complaints received, and refer that to the publication
for its immediate attention.
I should note that IPSO is able to consider complaints from an individual who
has been personally and directly involved in the coverage, or journalistic
activity, which gives rise to the alleged breach of the Editors’ Code of
Practice; complaints from a representative group affected by an alleged breach
where there is a substantial public interest; and complaints from third parties
about accuracy. In the case of third party complaints, we will need to consider
the position of the party most closely involved.
As such, we are unable to consider any concerns raised under Clauses other than
Clause 1 (Accuracy).
Once IPSO has concluded its investigation, the Complaints Committee will
consider the matter and issue a ruling on the complaint.
Unless we need further information from you, we will next be in touch to notify
you of the outcome when the decision is published.
With best wishes,
New sign support
author says they:
- tried to shape the base so that it would be easily detectable by long cane users, without being likely to trip anyone else. The ends are painted yellow to maximise contrast with the paving surface and rest of the sign.
- I’m still not delighted that these things can be put on the footway at all, or that some of the sign faces that can be attached overhang the base by more than the 150mm allowed by ‘Inclusive Mobility’
Nice read in the graUniad:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/may/30/the-tranquil...
This amazingly was in the telegraph somehow I was able to read it without paying https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/activity-and-adventure/britain-lookin...
If you are able to read it the comments below drag it back to telegraph normality!
Is the criticism of that surrey road safe video fair? The advice in at least this video is perfectly sensible and good and exactly what cyclists should do. Take the lane, especially of danger spots (junctions, constrictions).
Sound advice on how to ride defensively is in no way absolving drivers of their idiocy - it's just good advice on how to better cope with the reality that the world is full of said idiot drivers.
Are we losing the plot a bit here in attacking the makers of this video? Shouldn't that energy be directed elsewhere?
No its probably not fair, but it's twitter isn't it, just the attitude of the place.
I don't think people would be criticising it half as much if they had any belief that Surrey Roadsafe were also sending out twitter-stuff reminding motorists of their responsibilities on the road and how best to not kill people…
You might think Surrey police would be doing something about close passing as they are encouraging cyclists to "take the lane" but :
https://road.cc/content/news/4000-submissions-driving-offences-led-10-pr...
938 reports of close passes 3 NIPs and one driving course.
I might agree, if and only if Surrey were running an equivalent road safety campaign alongside this one aimed at educating drivers on how they can drive safely around vulnerable road users.
Did Surrey Roadsafe schedule this to automate posting a set of videos over a few days? You'd really think they might have paid attention to some of the feedback they've been getting…
And - as others have said - will they do the same videos aimed at the people who apparently can't be trusted to look where they're going??
Looking forward to tomorrow's "wear hi-viz to prevent collisions with inattentive drivers" video.
This is in the US, so they don't have the same phone-driving laws as us but still worth a watch.
"Suspended driver joins court hearing while driving"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/c133x22kzrpo
Yup, "hands free" use is legal in Michigan. They recently made video calling while driving illegal in my state, Illinois.
Lay off Chris Froome already I'd say. He has his faults, but one can also understand how hard it is to fall from this high...
I would presume that Ed Davey's bike isn't a fixie, so it has a freewheel? I'm pretty sure it would be far safer to go down that hill with his feet on the pedals…
Well the other day he was up here in Windermere constantly falling off a paddleboard, so I think he's going for the 'Lovable Frank Spencer' vote.
"Hmm... Boris did very well, popping up on a bike and playing the buffoon..."
The so-called “dangerous cycling” law has absolutely noting to do with making the roads safer, and everything to do with trying to suppress cycling as a means of transport. The motor industry is increasingly seeing cycling as a threat to their long-term profits.
that's even worse than trying to soothe the feelings of drivers who are feeling oppressed which is the other explanation
I don't know if its trying to supress cycling as a means of transport but will likely have that knock on consequence. To me its pandering to their potential voters, in the same vein as national service and asylum seeker policies
It's probably just me on this one but I don't really see the issue with creating a law that clarifies and improves the current mish-mash of unfit laws that have been used to prosecute a cyclist. Are we just being NIMBYS or is there a real reason (and not that it will be used once in a blue moon so isn't necessary) that this propose law is so bad.
It could always have the opposite effect to that which IDS and others think it will have and make it harder to get an appropriate punishment against a cyclist. If a cyclist is tried for death by dangerous cycling instead of manslaughter then it becomes rquivalent to the same in a motor vehicle.
We can rant about the punsishments for drivers of motor vehicles being to lenient but until a prosecution is brought against a cyclist for the equivalent crime it is very hard to determine what affect the law will have.
I do not see this as a tighter control on cycling and I would be suprised if the average person will worry about being caught by the law, getting more people on bikes is about making cycling safer for the cyclist and no this this law is not going to do that but it might allow the right wing gutter press to "educate" the driverati that cyclists are not above the law (not that they ever have been).
I dont think any reasonable cyclist would object to this law, execpt perhaps as the risk profile doesnt warrant the parliamentary time. HOWEVER it will almost certainly be used to hold cyclists to a higher standard and higher level of punishment than the equivalent crime commited in a vehicle. Thats what I and I ssupect most others object to.
Case in point - IIRC the proposal in the Criminal Justice Bill had a much higher minimum term for a cyclist than a motorist. (Saw this on Twitter but believe its true.)
https://www.lawyer-monthly.com/2024/05/causing-death-by-dangerous-cycling/
I don’t have an objection to the new law per se, but to promote it as achieving equality between motorists and cyclists is disingenuous when Clifford Rennie served no time in jail, but Charlie Alliston did.
The Clifford Rennie case is the more egregious outcome, yet no changes in the law or sentencing guidelines are proposed. That’s an odd kind of equality.
Absolutely. It's exactly the kind of equality wanted by those in motor industry, some politicians and at least some us in our cars.
"We all share the road - so it's fair the laws should be the same for all! Never mind that only some of us bring most of the potential negatives (danger, pollution, noise, infra damage, wear and tear etc.), and actually don't even fully pay for them."
"Oh, and by the way - the laws won't end up applying to some of us with equal force either."
In fact I'm in favour of more laws here: yes, cyclists who are careless / dangerous should be held accountable (at a level commensurate with the danger). But ... in fact they are already - but I'm fine with "straightening up the law" (not that I think this will satisfy those clamouring for it).
In addition though:
- Those installing or designing dangerous infra to be sanctioned.
- And those who wave it through, or were aware of "black spots" but found other things to spend the cash on.
- And (in my dreams) those politicians who brought about the situations in the first place (won't hurt them to hand over a bit of that motor-lobby or transport business cash).
If it did that no one would mind - the entire cycling + pedestrian lobby have been asking for a review of all road safety law since the Conservative administration promised it in 2014.
Instead we poisonous, dishonest little shit shoveller IDS leveraging a fake position.
Just read the debate and you can find him misleading Parliament. For example he quotes 6 "killer cyclists". Of those, two are clearly at fault, 3 are not at fault and 1 is ambiguous. Nonetheless, he is happy to be deceiving the House of Commons.
Fortunately IDS and many of his allies - Theresa Coffery for one - is about to be flushed into the cesspit of political history, where he belongs.
Pages