# Britains Most Hated Cyclist



## AyJay (16 Sep 2015)

Well what do you think?

Not sure I would agree with that.

http://home.bt.com/lifestyle/motori...-for-using-phone-while-driving-11364003844947


----------



## Tin Pot (16 Sep 2015)

I don't know why people can't abide by rules.

Unfortunately it seems to be the majority of the human race that have his affliction.


----------



## Milkfloat (16 Sep 2015)

The bus company reaction is terrible too - give all their drivers a bluetooth headset FFS. They should be instructing their drivers to have their phones turned off when they are driving, not give them the bare minimum to keep them legal.


----------



## EltonFrog (16 Sep 2015)

"...we have issued free Bluetooth headsets to all drivers now so there are no excuses."

Do what? Why? They shouldn't be on the feckin' phone at all.


----------



## mjr (16 Sep 2015)

I don't understand why this sort of thing isn't obvious to the police. I suspect riding a camera-equipped police bicycle along roadside cycle tracks, "salmoning" so they have a clear view of the oncoming drivers, would catch at least one phoney driver a mile on the A roads around here most of the day, including some driving large lorries. More in rush hour. If handheld phone use is one of the #fatal4 traffic policiing priorities, why does it seem to be left to the likes of Dave Sherry?


----------



## Tin Pot (16 Sep 2015)

Milkfloat said:


> The bus company reaction is terrible too - give all their drivers a bluetooth headset FFS. They should be instructing their drivers to have their phones turned off when they are driving, not give them the bare minimum to keep them legal.



I think their response was correct:

"Being a professional driver there's no excuse to be on a phone while driving… Dave has done a great job because he identified a driver who could have caused a disaster."


----------



## robjh (16 Sep 2015)

Typical bollox 'journalism'. '..has been dubbed 'Britain's most hated cyclist'. 
'_dubbed_'? by whom?* on what evidence? Even if all the other bus drivers in Epping hate him, that doesn't amount to mass loathing.

I'd never heard of him, but now I quite like him.

*probable answer : by the author of this piece of sh*te and no-one else


----------



## Milkfloat (16 Sep 2015)

Tin Pot said:


> I think their response was correct:
> 
> "Being a professional driver there's no excuse to be on a phone while driving… Dave has done a great job because he identified a driver who could have caused a disaster."



The important bit is this:
"Town Link director Mario Gioia has now issued all 22 of his drivers Bluetooth headsets so they can chat without holding their mobiles." and ....... Mario said: "The driver has been sacked and we have issued free Bluetooth headsets to all drivers now so there are no excuses.

Still think it is correct to encourage drivers to use their phone whilst driving, albeit handsfree?


----------



## Milkfloat (16 Sep 2015)

The worrying thing is that bus drivers don't seem to get the hint - Sueperb (Dave Sherry) has had previous with bus drivers and mobiles including a couple (at least) claimed job losses.


----------



## Lonestar (16 Sep 2015)

You can't drive to the best of your ability while using a mobile phone in any way.FACT.

*http://tinyurl.com/q7ys3vh*

*That link doesn't work for me in the OP.*


----------



## Simpleton (16 Sep 2015)

A poor article, he clearly is not the most hated cyclist in Britain and he is not a vigilante.


----------



## Lonestar (16 Sep 2015)

A comment on there.Not by me.Ever.

_I have seen a lot of these Idiots that use a mobile phone when driving ! but I have also seen a lot of IDIOTS on Cycles who think that they actually own the road and that they should be given president over everyone else, I do not commend drivers using mobiles while driving but stooping so low as to shop a work mate instead of just taking him to one side & saying look at this Mate !!!!! don't let there be a next time would have no doubt sufficed, costing a man his lively hood is not the best way to gain the respect of your boss or your colleagues & this preying parasite of the roads will no doubt be either snubbed by all who are unfortunate enough to work with him or an irate motorist who will not think twice about taking his camera and shoving it where it will no doubt belongs._

I take it car drivers own the road then? They pay road tax,you know.


----------



## EltonFrog (16 Sep 2015)

Lonestar said:


> _I have seen a lot of these Idiots that use a mobile phone when driving ! but I have also seen a lot of IDIOTS on Cycles who think that they actually own the road and that they should be given president over everyone else, I do not commend drivers using mobiles while driving but stooping so low as to shop a work mate instead of just taking him to one side & saying look at this Mate !!!!! don't let there be a next time would have no doubt sufficed, costing a man his lively hood is not the best way to gain the respect of your boss or your colleagues & this preying parasite of the roads will no doubt be either snubbed by all who are unfortunate enough to work with him or an irate motorist who will not think twice about taking his camera and shoving it where it will no doubt belongs._



The author does have a point.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Sep 2015)

He's like some Viz character always talking in idioms and clichés:
_Points don't win prizes, if you know what I mean...That's the way the cookie crumbles... by hook or by crook_ ...

He should rebrand himself Idiomatic Man.


GC


----------



## Lonestar (16 Sep 2015)

CarlP said:


> The author does have a point.



You really think that would stop the bus driver from doing it again? I do wonder why they booted him out anyway?

If it's a first offence would that be a warning,do it again and you are out?

If I did this at work I'd be straight out of the door.I wouldn't expect anything less.If someone "grassed" me so be it.It's my own fault,not theirs.


----------



## Origamist (16 Sep 2015)

glasgowcyclist said:


> He's like some Viz character always talking in idioms and clichés:
> _Points don't win prizes, if you know what I mean...That's the way the cookie crumbles... by hook or by crook_ ...
> 
> He should rebrand himself Idiomatic Man.
> ...



If the cap fits.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Sep 2015)

CarlP said:


> The author does have a point.



Where?

GC


----------



## Origamist (16 Sep 2015)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Where?
> 
> GC



Opening sentence.


----------



## EltonFrog (16 Sep 2015)

Lonestar said:


> You really think that would stop the bus driver from doing it again? I do wonder why they booted him out anyway?
> 
> If it's a first offence would that be a warning,do it again and you are out?
> 
> If I did this at work I'd be straight out of the door.I wouldn't expect anything less.If someone "grassed" me so be it.It's my own fault,not theirs.



Indeed.



glasgowcyclist said:


> Where?
> 
> GC



The author made several points, I'm not sure why you are asking the question.


----------



## suzeworld (16 Sep 2015)

glasgowcyclist said:


> He's like some Viz character always talking in idioms and clichés:
> _Points don't win prizes, if you know what I mean...That's the way the cookie crumbles... by hook or by crook_ ...
> 
> He should rebrand himself Idiomatic Man.
> ...



He coud be president.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Sep 2015)

CarlP said:


> Indeed.
> 
> 
> 
> The author made several points, I'm not sure why you are asking the question.



Because I'm not sure what his point is and if you were able to single it out from his rambling sentence I wondered if you'd share what you thought it was.

GC


----------



## EltonFrog (16 Sep 2015)

Lonestar said:


> _I have seen a lot of these Idiots that use a mobile phone when driving !_



Haven't we all.



> _but I have also seen a lot of IDIOTS on Cycles who think that they actually own the road and that they should be given president over everyone else._



So have I, and these cyclists are tedious.



> _do not commend drivers using mobiles while driving but stooping so low as to shop a work mate instead of just taking him to one side & saying look at this Mate !!!!! don't let there be a next time would have no doubt sufficed, costing a man his lively hood is not the best way to gain the respect of your boss or your colleagues_



If this is true, in my opinion it's pretty low, but we don't know this to be fact.



> _& this preying parasite of the roads will no doubt be either snubbed by all who are unfortunate enough to work with him or an irate motorist who will not think twice about taking his camera and shoving it where it will no doubt belong_



I wouldn't go that far, but I can understand and I do empathise with this point.


----------



## Mike_P (16 Sep 2015)

It may be that the drivers were on the mobiles for work purposes reporting late running etc hence the issuing of the hands free versions. Nottingham buses use to have radio which required the drivers to hold a handset.


----------



## classic33 (16 Sep 2015)

Mike_P said:


> It may be that the drivers were on the mobiles for work purposes reporting late running etc hence the issuing of the hands free versions. Nottingham buses use to have radio which required the drivers to hold a handset.


And a list of rules stating when they could and couldn't be used. Also a second, shorter list of the consequences of not following the first.


----------



## Dogtrousers (16 Sep 2015)

I thought this was going to be another Lance thread


----------



## steveindenmark (16 Sep 2015)

They may as well pin a target on this guys back. Because someone will get him one way or the other.


----------



## Lonestar (16 Sep 2015)

CarlP said:


> Haven't we all.
> *
> 
> *
> ...



You do know they were quotes from the original page comments.


----------



## winjim (16 Sep 2015)

I don't hate him. I think he's a sad loser and a profiteering troll, but I've told him that and he doesn't seem all that bothered.

ETA: Oh yeah, and his own roadcraft leaves something to be desired.


----------



## Dec66 (16 Sep 2015)

Britain's Most Hated Cyclist = Boris Johnson, surely?
Well, that's what the cabbies down here think anyway.


----------



## EltonFrog (16 Sep 2015)

Lonestar said:


> You do know they were quotes from the original page comments.



Yes. Why?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Sep 2015)

CarlP said:


> Haven't we all.
> *
> 
> *
> ...




I could read all the words he'd written; they didn't seem to come to an obvious point. I still don't see it.

GC


----------



## Origamist (16 Sep 2015)

steveindenmark said:


> They may as well pin a target on this guys back. Because someone will get him one way or the other.



Mmm, I'm not sure who will get him first. Let's have a sweep stake:

Evens: A careless or reckless driver.
2:1 ISIS
4:1 A UK Gov Reaper Drone Strike
10-1: A recently sacked bus driver
15-1 winjim
20-1 Some other guy on the internet
50-1: An anti-camera, vigilante motorist


----------



## Lonestar (16 Sep 2015)

CarlP said:


> Yes. Why?



Just testing.Others may think I posted that guff.



Origamist said:


> Mmm, I'm not sure who will get him first. Lets have a sweep stake:
> 
> Evens: A careless or reckless driver.
> 2:1 ISIS
> ...



You missed out Addison Lee.Or is that Evens?


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (16 Sep 2015)

So according to some of these commenters I can walk around this factory I'm in and not mention if someone has taken the guards off the 3 foot circular saws that could slice someone in two, as that's ratting on a colleague. What a load of daffodils!


----------



## EltonFrog (16 Sep 2015)

Nigel-YZ1 said:


> So according to some of these commenters I can walk around this factory I'm in and not mention if someone has taken the guards off the 3 foot circular saws that could slice someone in two, as that's ratting on a colleague. What a load of daffodils!



No. Not the same thing at all and please refrain from insulting posters.


----------



## Gravity Aided (16 Sep 2015)

I drive a bus, and don't use the phone. Under my states laws, all drivers are not supposed to use the phone whilst driving. I would be fired if I did this, so I don't do it. There is some evidence that the amount of concentration required to participate in an involved telephone call makes your attention so impaired that it is almost as bad as driving while legally intoxicated.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vFcIpzF7pc


----------



## Simontm (16 Sep 2015)

Lonestar said:


> *
> Cycles who think that they actually own the road and that they should be given president over everyone else,*
> 
> .


I've met Bill Clinton, does that count?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Sep 2015)

Gravity Aided said:


> I drive a bus, and don't use the phone. Under my states laws, all drivers are not supposed to use the phone whilst driving. I would be fired if I did this, so I don't do it. There is some evidence that the amount of concentration required to participate in an involved telephone call makes your attention so impaired that it is almost as bad as driving while legally intoxicated.
> 
> View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vFcIpzF7pc




Also







GC


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Sep 2015)

Nigel-YZ1 said:


> So according to some of these commenters I can walk around this factory I'm in and not mention if someone has taken the guards off the 3 foot circular saws that could slice someone in two, as that's ratting on a colleague. What a load of daffodils!



He does appear to think that while drivers on mobiles are a bad, you shouldn't report one if you work for the same firm. 

GC


----------



## winjim (16 Sep 2015)

Origamist said:


> Mmm, I'm not sure who will get him first. Let's have a sweep stake:
> 
> Evens: A careless or reckless driver.
> 2:1 ISIS
> ...


Me? I'm flattered but it seems unlikely, he never returns my calls.


----------



## Lonestar (16 Sep 2015)

Simontm said:


> I've met Bill Clinton, does that count?



Does he cycle?


----------



## Origamist (16 Sep 2015)

winjim said:


> Me? I'm flattered but it seems unlikely, he never returns my calls.



Vengeful stalker in denial. Odds on winjim slashed to 6-1...


----------



## mjr (16 Sep 2015)

Simontm said:


> I've met Bill Clinton, does that count?


I don't know: did he give himself to you?


----------



## Luddite Joe (16 Sep 2015)

And did he inhale?


----------



## snorri (16 Sep 2015)

This is not the first article on BT dot com motoring section to show a negative bias towards cycling and cyclists. As a BT customer I have complained before but did not even receive the courtesy of a reply.


----------



## Lonestar (16 Sep 2015)

CarlP said:


> The author does have a point.



Ooops sorry,misread,misunderstood this post. @CarlP


----------



## mjr (16 Sep 2015)

snorri said:


> This is not the first article on BT dot com motoring section to show a negative bias towards cycling and cyclists. As a BT customer I have complained before but did not even receive the courtesy of a reply.


Vote with your wallet. BT have behaved horribly for years on end and yet still dominate the market (44% of fixed-line, 32% of broadband - source: Ofcom data 2015Q1) so why would they change a winning strategy?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Sep 2015)

snorri said:


> This is not the first article on BT dot com motoring section to show a negative bias towards cycling and cyclists. As a BT customer I have complained before but did not even receive the courtesy of a reply.



The articles are not written by BT employees and don't represent BT's position on any subject.

GC


----------



## summerdays (16 Sep 2015)

I've reported a bus driver, but didn't have enough information to identify him (though you would have though bus number and location should have gone a long way given the gaps between buses). However I've always hoped that the staff got a reminder to everyone that they shouldn't be using their phones.

Would I report a colleague, I think I would if I thought what they were doing was going to put others at risk.


----------



## mjr (16 Sep 2015)

glasgowcyclist said:


> The articles are not written by BT employees and don't represent BT's position on any subject.


BS. They still choose to republish them - and they're probably paying for them. If it doesn't represent BT's position, they should stop republishing them. Equally, if it doesn't represent a BT customer's position, that customer should stop paying BT to republish them IMO.


----------



## benb (16 Sep 2015)

Why do some people expect that one should turn a blind eye to dangerous behaviour just because it's from a colleague?


----------



## Markymark (16 Sep 2015)

Because lots of people dislike cyclists and think the law breaking cyclists do is on a par with a bus driver on a mobile.


----------



## blazed (16 Sep 2015)

benb said:


> Why do some people expect that one should turn a blind eye to dangerous behaviour just because it's from a colleague?



Would you report a friend, family member or partner?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Sep 2015)

mjray said:


> BS. They still choose to republish them - and they're probably paying for them. If it doesn't represent BT's position, they should stop republishing them. Equally, if it doesn't represent a BT customer's position, that customer should stop paying BT to republish them IMO.



They're an ISP and the news stories are one of a number of features on their portal. They have about 7.5 million broadband customers so do you really expect they can do something that would satisfy possibly 7.5 million different opinions?

If you disagree with what's written you should take it up with the author, or write a rebuttal and submit it.

GC


----------



## Dayvo (16 Sep 2015)

blazed said:


> Would you report a friend, family member or partner?



I'd certainly have a word with them if some irresponsible action was likely to put others at risk.


----------



## benb (16 Sep 2015)

blazed said:


> Would you report a friend, family member or partner?



No, because no one I'm friends with would be so stupid and dangerous.


----------



## Berk on a Bike (16 Sep 2015)

If the moniker "Britain's Most Hated Cyclist" won't stick to our cammed-up crusader, here's a couple of other candidates







Nice shorts, Dave...


----------



## mjr (16 Sep 2015)

Berk on a Bike said:


> Nice shorts, Dave...


They're shorts? I thought he'd got dressed in the dark and grabbed some 1970s curtains by mistake.


----------



## Berk on a Bike (16 Sep 2015)

mjray said:


> They're shorts? I thought he'd got dressed in the dark and grabbed some 1970s curtains by mistake.


Or grabbed his mum's pinny in a rush


----------



## shouldbeinbed (16 Sep 2015)

Is it our Glenn with so many tales of woe and windscreen washers full of p*ss being fired at him


----------



## Drago (16 Sep 2015)

While this guy is a Camera C**k he's not the same league as Twaffic Dwoid and his sidekick The Boy Wonder, and in this case I'm right behind him - the bus driver is a menace and deserves all that came his way.


----------



## winjim (16 Sep 2015)

Drago said:


> While this guy is a Camera C**k he's not the same league as Twaffic Dwoid and his sidekick The Boy Wonder, and in this case I'm right behind him - the bus driver is a menace and deserves all that came his way.


You do realise that's @sue perb in the article?


----------



## Drago (16 Sep 2015)

winjim said:


> You do realise that's @sue perb in the article?



Well, you live and learn! Didn't recognise him without his cape.


----------



## winjim (16 Sep 2015)

Origamist said:


> Vengeful stalker in denial. Odds on winjim slashed to 6-1...


I hope I see him out riding while I'm driving my car. I'd like to see if I can get featured in one of his videos.


----------



## NorthernDave (16 Sep 2015)

steveindenmark said:


> They may as well pin a target on this guys back. Because someone will get him one way or the other.



Or more likely, they'll get one of the rest of us - cos all cyclists are the same aren't they? (in a significant number of motorists opinions)


----------



## bladesman73 (16 Sep 2015)

CarlP said:


> No. Not the same thing at all and please refrain from insulting posters.


 it is the same thing. The idiot driver was putting lives at risk. As for the morons shouting "grass"..they need to grow up. You are no longer at school and you dont live on the set of lock stock. I would "grass" on anyone who was doing what that driver was doing.


----------



## glenn forger (16 Sep 2015)

NorthernDave said:


> Or more likely, they'll get one of the rest of us - cos all cyclists are the same aren't they? (in a significant number of motorists opinions)



steve has a long list of stuff that he reckons will get cyclists killed and gives us all a bad name. He's the sort of driver who gives drivers a bad name.


----------



## Simpleton (16 Sep 2015)

glenn forger said:


> steve has a long list of stuff that he reckons will get cyclists killed and gives us all a bad name. He's the sort of driver who gives drivers a bad name.



Gives drivers a bad name?


----------



## glenn forger (16 Sep 2015)

Yeah, he lets all drivers down. No wonder so many drivers are hated.


----------



## Simpleton (16 Sep 2015)

I don't really hate drivers. I find it interferes with the karma of riding a bike. I do wish for people's attitudes towards cyclists to change though.


----------



## Accy cyclist (17 Sep 2015)

I think the bloke with he camera is doing a public service. There are far too many using phones while driving. The other day i saw a driver of a big skip wagon texting while driving. Imagine if he'd have broke suddenly and half the skip's load was shed over the road or worse on a passing cyclist. There are far too many idiots making and receiving phone calls while in charge of a vehicle. They deserve punishment if caught, that includes losing their job.


----------



## Gravity Aided (17 Sep 2015)

Lonestar said:


> Does he cycle?


----------



## buggi (17 Sep 2015)

Tin Pot said:


> I think their response was correct:
> 
> "Being a professional driver there's no excuse to be on a phone while driving… Dave has done a great job because he identified a driver who could have caused a disaster."


It wasn't. Any road safety bod will tell you that hands free is just as bad a distraction as holding a mobile. As soon as they issued hands free they undermined their own statement.


----------



## Gravity Aided (17 Sep 2015)

Origamist said:


> Vengeful stalker in denial. Odds on winjim slashed to 6-1...







Another side of Robert de Niro, from _Stanley and Iris._


----------



## liambauckham (17 Sep 2015)

glasgowcyclist said:


> He's like some Viz character always talking in idioms and clichés:
> _Points don't win prizes, if you know what I mean...That's the way the cookie crumbles... by hook or by crook_ ...
> 
> He should rebrand himself Idiomatic Man.
> ...



Awesome idea. I think he should team up with that guy who shouts "oiiiiiiiii" every five minutes


----------



## classic33 (17 Sep 2015)

winjim said:


> Me? I'm flattered but it seems unlikely, he never returns my calls.


You still witholding your nuumber?


----------



## Drago (17 Sep 2015)

Simpleton said:


> I don't really hate drivers. I find it interferes with the karma of riding a bike. I do wish for people's attitudes towards cyclists to change though.



That's fair enough, but in the interests of peace and harmony cyclists attitudes to car drivers should also perk up somewhat. There's a fair proportion of both car driver AND cyclists that behave like tools on the road, and the sooner we all understand that people were born idiots and didn't simply become that way the day they bought a car/bicycle/segway/private jet [delete as applicable] then the better we'll all get along.


----------



## Simpleton (17 Sep 2015)

Drago said:


> That's fair enough, but in the interests of peace and harmony cyclists attitudes to car drivers should also perk up somewhat. There's a fair proportion of both car driver AND cyclists that behave like tools on the road, and the sooner we all understand that people were born idiots and didn't simply become that way the day they bought a car/bicycle/segway/private jet [delete as applicable] then the better we'll all get along.



What are you trying to get at?

I fully understand that some drivers and cyclists behave like idiots. That's a given and pretty much everyone will tell you this who has been cycling/driving. But the distinct difference is that a bad attitude towards vulnerable road users and the driving that follows can and does kill people.

What examples would you class as something that a cyclist does to act the tool which has led to a KSI stat?

You may think I should get off my high horse but I'm bringing some perspective.


----------



## winjim (17 Sep 2015)

Accy cyclist said:


> I think the bloke with he camera is doing a public service. There are far too many using phones while driving. The other day i saw a driver of a big skip wagon texting while driving. Imagine if he'd have broke suddenly and half the skip's load was shed over the road or worse on a passing cyclist. There are far too many idiots making and receiving phone calls while in charge of a vehicle. They deserve punishment if caught, that includes losing their job.


In this particular case the driver shouldn't have been in the phone and it is right that he lost his job*. But, and it's a big but, Dave Sherry is not interested in road safety. He is interested in his own ego, his notoriety and his YouTube channel. He will be positively revelling in the title of most hated cyclist.

He has been caught out lying on this very forum and refuses to engage in debate about his own roadcraft or his motives for posting his videos. I think he may see himself as a bit of a hero but has got himself so wrapped up in the character he has created that he is unable to objectively look at his actions. Anyone whose response when asked if they are ok after an incident is "I've got it on camera" has their priorities a bit wrong imho.


*Not that hands free are any better. This was covered in an episode of All In The Mind which @User13710 linked to some time ago if anyone wants to search for it. I'm not sure if it's still available though.


----------



## summerdays (17 Sep 2015)

Even if the bus driver somehow thought using a hand held phone didn't cause a problem, I imagine his terms and conditions of employment made it quite clear that he wasn't to do so whilst sitting in the drivers seat of the bus, and probably spelt out what would happen if caught using one. I don't feel sorry for him and hope this hits home with a few other people who think it's ok. This case gives it a bit of publicity.


----------



## Brandane (17 Sep 2015)

buggi said:


> It wasn't. Any road safety bod will tell you that hands free is just as bad a distraction as holding a mobile. As soon as they issued hands free they undermined their own statement.


+1 ... I drive lorries sometimes, and use bluetooth hands free to communicate with the office of whatever company I happen to be driving for. They invariably phone you with instructions for collections and/or deliveries which distract you from the task in hand, i.e. driving the lorry! Please don't suggest pulling over to take the call, it isn't always convenient on the M6 or wherever, and in these modern days of trackers, transport managers want to know why you have stopped unnecessarily (in their view).

Another point I want to make is the reference to "professional drivers". WTF? What makes them professional? They have just passed another test or two. A lot of them like myself don't drive "professionally", but do it part time as a second income. In any case they might have just passed their HGV test last week; yet people are expecting them to somehow have super powers when it comes to driving. Don't expect too much and you won't be disappointed! Pay peanuts get monkeys also springs to mind in some cases.


----------



## mjr (17 Sep 2015)

Brandane said:


> They invariably phone you with instructions for collections and/or deliveries which distract you from the task in hand, i.e. driving the lorry!


I don't understand why they would do that. Wouldn't it be better if they sent a message with such instructions, which the phone can read out and then you could refer to it later if needed?


Brandane said:


> Pay peanuts get monkeys also springs to mind in some cases.


Yes, there seems to be some problems with how some drivers are paid.


----------



## winjim (17 Sep 2015)

User said:


> I am not sure that he is the only one who is wrapped up in obsessing about his persona.


I'm not sure if you're specifically referring to me or not. 

We all have different personas, be it online, offline, with friends, colleagues, family, whatever. Dave Sherry is building up a public media profile, with appearances on TV, in the papers etc and seems to want to position himself as a spokesperson for cyclists. I think that this makes it reasonable for me to comment on, criticise and even ridicule the sue perb vigilante superhero character that he has created, especially where it conflicts with my opinion on how to achieve his stated objective of "safer roads for all".

As for me, I'm just some dickhead chatting bollocks on the internet. My opinions, contradictory, stupid or just plain wrong as they may sometimes be, are mine alone and I represent nobody and nothing.


----------



## Brandane (17 Sep 2015)

mjray said:


> I don't understand why they would do that. Wouldn't it be better if they sent a message with such instructions, which the phone can read out and then you could refer to it later if needed?


I suspect that it's down to time. Transport managers are busy people trying to juggle with several different vehicles, drivers, freight loads, freight in warehouses, and customers, all at the same time. Plus it's easier to answer any queries from the driver at the same time by phoning.


----------



## Hip Priest (17 Sep 2015)

I think there's something a bit snide about informing on a colleague, but on the other hand, mobile phone / tablet use behind the wheel is lethal, so on balance I'd say Mr Sherry did the right thing.


----------



## summerdays (17 Sep 2015)

Put it this way if some I know rings me and it sounds as if they are driving, I ask them to ring back later.


----------



## Hip Priest (17 Sep 2015)

summerdays said:


> Put it this way if some I know rings me and it sounds as if they are driving, I ask them to ring back later.



Which isn't the same as getting them sacked.


----------



## Brandane (17 Sep 2015)

buggi said:


> It wasn't. Any road safety bod will tell you that hands free is just as bad a distraction as holding a mobile. As soon as they issued hands free they undermined their own statement.


My confession: Last week I was driving a car on the A9 towards Inverness from Perth. A long, boring road with sections of dual carriageway in between the single carriageways. There are now average speed cameras along its length. I decided to break the boredom by making a phone call on the bluetooth system integral with the car audio. I was on a section of dual carriageway sticking to the 70mph limit. Engrossed in the conversation, I didn't realise until sometime later that the dual carriageway had ended and I was doing 70 on the single carriageway. I will let you know if a speeding ticket drops through my door. Just an example of how the distraction is more down to the actual phone call, rather than the physical aspect of holding a phone; which let's face it is no worse than changing a CD, lighting a cigarette, or a multitude of other things which are perfectly legal. Young children in a car must be the worst distraction of all.


----------



## glenn forger (17 Sep 2015)

I wonder if any of the Glasgow bin lorry driver's colleagues knew about his medical history and remained quiet, anxious not to grass a colleague and stitch him up like a kipper.


----------



## summerdays (17 Sep 2015)

Hip Priest said:


> Which isn't the same as getting them sacked.


They aren't driving in a professional capacity, and I can't actually see them doing it.


----------



## summerdays (17 Sep 2015)

glenn forger said:


> I wonder if any of the Glasgow bin lorry driver's colleagues knew about his medical history and remained quiet, anxious not to grass a colleague and stitch him up like a kipper.


I would feel really really bad if I'd kept quiet and something happened that me speaking out might have prevented. I'd like to think they hadn't noticed as why would you be in the cab with someone whose driving you were worried about.

In a past job I had a boss that I shared a car with to meetings occasionally, I didn't rate his driving at all, and eventually I told him I preferred going by public transport rather than get in a car with him. Ok I didn't report him to his boss, we just agreed to go by public transport in future. Last I heard he had given up driving.


----------



## benb (17 Sep 2015)

Hip Priest said:


> Which isn't the same as getting them sacked.



I emailed a taxi company a few years ago after one of their drivers passed me very close and fast, after having gone the wrong side of a keep left sign.
They emailed back to thank me and to say they had let the driver go.

Did I feel guilty about getting someone sacked? No.
It was entirely the driver's fault - if they hadn't driven like a dangerous idiot they'd still have a job. The same holds true in this case. You're blaming the wrong person for the driver getting sacked.


----------



## summerdays (17 Sep 2015)

User said:


> I bought a Brompton for similar reasons.


I hadn't rediscovered cycling at that point, wish I had!


----------



## Hip Priest (17 Sep 2015)

benb said:


> I emailed a taxi company a few years ago after one of their drivers passed me very close and fast, after having gone the wrong side of a keep left sign.
> They emailed back to thank me and to say they had let the driver go.
> 
> Did I feel guilty about getting someone sacked? No.
> It was entirely the driver's fault - if they hadn't driven like a dangerous idiot they'd still have a job. The same holds true in this case. You're blaming the wrong person for the driver getting sacked.



I'm not blaming anyone. You've made the wrong inferrence from my comment.


----------



## benb (17 Sep 2015)

Hip Priest said:


> I'm not blaming anyone. You've made the wrong inferrence from my comment.



Sorry, I thought you were implying that one shouldn't report people in case they lost their job.


----------



## Hip Priest (17 Sep 2015)

benb said:


> Sorry, I thought you were implying that one shouldn't report people in case they lost their job.



To clarify, I think there is something snide about informing on a colleague. For example, we're not allowed to use our mobiles at our desks. If a colleague told the boss that they'd seen me sending a text, I'd regard them as a grass. However, if I was doing something genuinely dangerous, different rules apply. So I think Dave Sherry did the right thing.


----------



## benb (17 Sep 2015)

Hip Priest said:


> To clarify, I think there is something snide about informing on a colleague. For example, we're not allowed to use our mobiles at our desks. If a colleague told the boss that they'd seen me sending a text, I'd regard them as a grass. However, if I was doing something genuinely dangerous, different rules apply. So I think Dave Sherry did the right thing.



Yeah, I wouldn't bother if they were checking facebook at their desk (if they consistently took the piss I might have a word), but I have a zero-tolerance attitude to people doing something that endangers people, so I'd report someone driving on the phone without a second thought, whether I knew them or not.


----------



## User33236 (17 Sep 2015)

Hip Priest said:


> To clarify, I think there is something snide about informing on a colleague. For example, we're not allowed to use our mobiles at our desks. If a colleague told the boss that they'd seen me sending a text, I'd regard them as a grass. However, if I was doing something genuinely dangerous, different rules apply. So I think Dave Sherry did the right thing.


Glad you added the last part.

In my line of work, if we do things wrong, patients can come to harm. I have reported colleagues for dangerous behavior and would not hesitate to do it again.


----------



## liambauckham (17 Sep 2015)

maybe he could have given him a warning?


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (17 Sep 2015)

CarlP said:


> No. Not the same thing at all and please refrain from insulting posters.



Well that's me put in my place.


----------



## summerdays (17 Sep 2015)

liambauckham said:


> maybe he could have given him a warning?


I would expect his terms and conditions are quite clear about using a hand held mobile whilst at the wheel of a bus. Why would you expect a warning if you have been told Don't do it unless you want a P45.

Everyone else at his place of employment has now been warned what will happen in this situation.


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (17 Sep 2015)

benb said:


> Why do some people expect that one should turn a blind eye to dangerous behaviour just because it's from a colleague?



That's what I said but I got told off for it


----------



## benb (17 Sep 2015)

Nigel-YZ1 said:


> That's what I said but I got told off for it



I thought your analogy was fine.


----------



## liambauckham (17 Sep 2015)

summerdays said:


> I would expect his terms and conditions are quite clear about using a hand held mobile whilst at the wheel of a bus. Why would you expect a warning if you have been told Don't do it unless you want a P45.
> 
> Everyone else at his place of employment has now been warned what will happen in this situation.




Yeah I totally get that but im talking about the person. Like if I saw a colleague doing something like that I'd probably give them a warning and if they acted like a dick or did it again then they are fair game.

and to clarify when i say act like a dick i mean 

me "he mr i saw you breaking the law the other day" 

him " f***** you!" 

then he's fair game.


----------



## benb (17 Sep 2015)

Whereas I'd prefer to get dangerous drivers off the road ASAP.
Why do they deserve a warning? What if after you've given them a warning they run someone over and kill them?


----------



## EltonFrog (17 Sep 2015)

I just pointed out that the person who posted the comment on the news item up thread made a valid point about a chap losing his job for using a phone whilst driving a bus. One of the points that the author made was, that perhaps a private "heads up" might have been appropriate. The bus driver would have had his card marked, and hopefully would not have used the phone again whilst driving, and perhaps he would not have lost his job. The result hopefully might have been a safer bus driver who was still in employment, and possibly one less enemy of the cyclist. A win win.

What we do not know is, that there may have been other things that caused the driver to lose his job, this may have been the a third warning for example.

I did not say I agreed with the point of view, I do not, I just said that author of that comment on the news site had in my opinion a point.

I really wish members of this forum who do not agree with each other could post their views and opinions without being rude and making personal insults. There is no need for it, this is meant to be a fun and friendly forum, although I find it is becoming less so, there really are some very unpleasant contributors here lately. I'm getting a little weary of it.


----------



## summerdays (17 Sep 2015)

CarlP said:


> I just pointed out that the person who posted the comment on the news item up thread made a valid point about a chap losing his job for using a phone whilst driving a bus. One of the points that the author made was, that perhaps a private "heads up" might have been appropriate. The bus driver would have had his card marked, and hopefully would not have used the phone again whilst driving, and perhaps he would not have lost his job. The result hopefully might have been a safer bus driver who was still in employment, and possibly one less enemy of the cyclist. A win win.
> 
> What we do not know is, that there may have been other things that caused the driver to lose his job, this may have been the a third warning for example.
> 
> ...


I'm not convinced that someone who knows they are breaking the law then becomes a safer driver because they have had a warning. He knew he was breaking the law and his company's regulations so therefore he starts off from a position of being a risk taker. I don't want him in charge of a bus that I'm either in on on the road with. Plus it doesn't spread a message to other drivers, or if it does the message is .... "do this and we will give you a little slap on the hand, then you carry on as before!" Or make sure you don't get caught again (note not the same as don't do it again).


----------



## Cer_r0bbo (17 Sep 2015)

The bus driver could have been caught by anyone... I really don't understand why the cyclist who catches these people wants all the publicity though! It's dangerous enough being a cyclist!


----------



## Drago (17 Sep 2015)

He proudly boasts about being thumped during some interviews.

Problem is, while Batman may be hard as nails and have all the toys, Robin has no super powers and is only really safe when in company with the caped crusader.


----------



## buggi (17 Sep 2015)

Brandane said:


> My confession: Last week I was driving a car on the A9 towards Inverness from Perth. A long, boring road with sections of dual carriageway in between the single carriageways. There are now average speed cameras along its length. I decided to break the boredom by making a phone call on the bluetooth system integral with the car audio. I was on a section of dual carriageway sticking to the 70mph limit. Engrossed in the conversation, I didn't realise until sometime later that the dual carriageway had ended and I was doing 70 on the single carriageway. I will let you know if a speeding ticket drops through my door. Just an example of how the distraction is more down to the actual phone call, rather than the physical aspect of holding a phone; which let's face it is no worse than changing a CD, lighting a cigarette, or a multitude of other things which are perfectly legal. Young children in a car must be the worst distraction of all.


I recently went on a road safety course and they were showing an interview with a HGV driver who was in prison for exactly that. He was on his hands free and like you hadn't noticed the change due to being engrossed in conversation. In his case though he had gone over a roundabout but not noticed that the dual carriageway had gone back to single carriageway. He hit a car head on and killed the driver. Very sad. 

I asked a road safety expert why hands free is different to talking to a passenger and they said its because the person on the phone can't see the road ahead so they don't stop talking when you need to concentrate, like a passenger does. Also it's not normally general chit chat, but business calls which distract you even more. 

I also worked with a guy who the cops came to collect bcoz his wife and child had been in a car crash. They think the child was sick and the mom turned round to deal with it and drove into the back of a HGV. They were so badly injured they took them to separate hospitals but they both died before the cops could get him there. Thankfully she had not picked up their little girl from nursery so he still had her.


----------



## Drago (17 Sep 2015)

I mean, come on, if this guy lost you your job you would feel pretty safe planting one on him...


----------



## Gravity Aided (18 Sep 2015)

Drago said:


> I mean, come on, if this guy lost you your job you would feel pretty safe planting one on him...
> View attachment 104091


I believe he is surrounded by many large dogs, however. Burt Ward has an animal adoption league called "Gentle Giants" or some such, who rescue large breed dogs like Great Danes and Bull Mastiffs.


----------

