Disappointing to read this from the herald. About the only merit is that he does distinguish between 'sport' and 'transport'.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
Herald: mamils= boy racers?
(16 posts)-
Posted 11 years ago #
-
I dislike news behind a paywall, so have only read the first sentence.
I hear golf club memberships in Scotland are down 17% in the past decade (feature on Scotland 2014 last night). Maybe cycling is the new golf after all.
Posted 11 years ago # -
For some reason it interprets my work browser as a mobile, so shows me the whole abhorrent thing:
"Bullying cyclists are a menace to society
Published on 20 June 2014Robert McNeil
HANDS up who hasn't had a run-in with a militant, macho cyclist?
I don't mean just car users, where I expect the figure to reach about 100 per cent, but pedestrians too.
You know the kind of cyclist I mean: all is vanity. Dressed in tight Lycra, like Dafydd the only cyclist in the village, his arms are set on the handlebars to display his biceps, as his frog-like legs pedal furiously. He wears wicked shades, an insect-head helmet, and has athletic signage on his inappropriate habiliments.
He sees himself not as an ordinary, everyday, peaceful road user, but as a superior athlete using the public highway for sport. He is a danger, and you have to distinguish him from ordinary, decent cyclists just trying to get from A to B.
See, cycling has changed. Once it was a peaceful, pleasant activity, performed at a leisurely pace. Cyclists signalled and wouldn't dream of going through a red light. Today, many don't recognise red lights as applying to them. They don't even see them as advisory. They see them as irrelevant or as opportunities.
The problem lies, as so often, with young men, who are also a menace in cars and should not be allowed to drive until the age of 52 or maybe 53. I cannot recall one incident with a female cyclist. The militants are entirely male. I saw one aggressive bully cause distress to an innocent female driver inadvertently caught in the cycling zone at lights after the traffic in front of her unexpectedly stopped and she was stranded on the red.
Cycling campaigners stymie debate with whataboutery. We're aware there are aggressive, dangerous motorists (mostly, but not always, male). But we don't need their equivalent on two wheels as well, particularly when cycling requires fitness and particularly suits the young, making the ratio of macho bullies to decent road users greater than among motorists.
If boy racers in cars are a bad thing, why do we tolerate speeding sports types on bikes? And all this on public roads used for commerce and for leisure by the inoffensive, elderly and orderly, or indeed on public footpaths used by the peace-loving, the slow and even pets (a dog was killed by a cyclist on a path I used to frequent, before it became overrun by cyclists).
The other day, half-way up my favourite hill, I was taking in the view when - whoosh! - a scarlet-clad mountain biker came violently and silently speeding past me, missing my body by inches.
Back on the roads, even decent cyclists are often dozy. Encountering parked cars in their way they just pull out into the traffic behind without looking or signalling, and it's up to everyone else to brake and make way.
I'm a considerate driver and always give cyclists plenty of room, but on most urban roads there's no need for motorists to cross the centre-line into oncoming traffic. I've seen so many near accidents caused by this. The optimum position is with your right wheels on the centre line's inside edge. If another motorist from the opposite direction looks like having to perform a similar manoeuvre at the same time, let him go first.
Every motorist will also have experienced a cyclist sneaking up on the inside, an overtaking manoeuvre that's a no-no for motorists and that endangers cyclists themselves in the event of a blind-sided motorist turning left into their path.
As for cyclists using narrow, winding, 60mph country roads, that's a dangerous absurdity. The truth is that bicycles and cars cannot co-exist. It isn't fair on either side.
Advanced countries like Holland and Denmark quickly separated cyclists from other road users, but libertarian Britain has by and large just watched as the hassle grows.
We need a better infrastructure for the many decent cyclists, one that separates them from motor vehicles. On the few dedicated cycle lanes, you get the feeling the militants don't like the safety and would rather be warring with cars.
Indeed, you hear of them bullying decent, slower cyclists. Banning their lurid costumery might help to make them behave. But, like poor drivers, I suspect they'll always be with us."
Posted 11 years ago # -
I'm not sure I understand the significance of this paragraph:
I'm a considerate driver and always give cyclists plenty of room, but on most urban roads there's no need for motorists to cross the centre-line into oncoming traffic. I've seen so many near accidents caused by this. The optimum position is with your right wheels on the centre line's inside edge. If another motorist from the opposite direction looks like having to perform a similar manoeuvre at the same time, let him go first.
Some of his best friends are cyclists, no doubt, but is he saying that you shouldn't cross the centre-line when overtaking a cyclist? It's a bit of a non-sequetur in that place in the article…. I'm not sure what he means.
Posted 11 years ago # -
FTFY
I'm not a considerate driver and never give cyclists enough room. On most urban roads there's no need for motorists to cross the centre-line into oncoming traffic. I've seen so many near accidents caused by overtaking with excessive space when traffic is coming in the other direction. The optimum position is with your left wheels on the the cyclists head.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I remember Robert McNeil articles from way way back as being quite funny, I don't recall him taking himself that seriously.
But there is no humour at all in that article (apart from, at a push, the Dafydd comment), it's just a boring rant.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Here's the low-down on columnist Robert McNeil:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/robert-mcneil
Seems he doesn't like joggers, either. His whingeing, unselfconscious idiocy reminds me of Private Eye's fictitious columnist Glenda Slagg or 'A Taxi Driver Writes'.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Yes, I get the impression he thinks of himself as funny but when you are frequently on the receiving end of motorist aggression it becomes difficult to see the "joke".
Posted 11 years ago # -
Wow, there are so many factual inaccuracies and contradictions in that I lost count. If what he is saying is that every stretch of 60mph road should have segregated cycle path added then I guess I have to agree with him though.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Clickbait once again
Posted 11 years ago # -
is he saying that you shouldn't cross the centre-line when overtaking a cyclist? It's a bit of a non-sequetur in that place in the article…. I'm not sure what he means.
The same paragraph stood out to me.
Is he trying to suggest that this is caused by cyclists not being sufficiently in the gutter?
Or does he not know you're meant to give as much space when passing a cyclist as when passing a car - and he's suggesting close passes?
I would suggest that, on the majority of Edinburgh roads, cars should not overtake cyclists unless they can cross the white line. Otherwise, the space is simply inadequate.
Posted 11 years ago # -
As for cyclists using narrow, winding, 60mph country roads, that's a dangerous absurdity.
Yes, there's no way those roads should be 60mph.
Maybe MrMcNeil could explain how people in the countryside should get from A to B.
(If, for example, they're 15 years old.)
Posted 11 years ago # -
Maybe MrMcNeil could explain how people in the countryside should get from A to B.
Obviously they use the free parental taxi service. I mean, everybody really wants teenagers to have no freedom and be completely dependent upon their parents until they get a driving license, don't they? That's just the way of the world.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I couldn't decide which bit of the article I liked the least. Suffice it to say that whether I am in lycra or not, endangering my life with inconsiderate driving is likely to lead to me feeling aggressive! I suppose he can then decide if I am young and sporting or not.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Advanced countries like Holland and Denmark quickly separated cyclists from other road users, but libertarian Britain has by and large just watched as the hassle grows.
Not libertarian. Pro-motorist, and consistently so.
We need a better infrastructure for the many decent cyclists, one that separates them from motor vehicles. On the few dedicated cycle lanes, you get the feeling the militants don't like the safety and would rather be warring with cars.
The militants are used to rushing, because that's the only urban riding style they've ever known. But rushing is incompatible with pedestrians and generic narrow infrastructure.
Posted 11 years ago # -
He talks about "speeding sporty types" and then moans about them having the audacity to move out into the road to overtake parked vehicles, resulting in the traffic behind having to "brake and make way".
So on a cluttered urban road, which road user does he think is using excessive speed in this scenario? What an imbecile.
Posted 11 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
