# Cyclist abuses woman after he rode two abreast.



## Cycleops (20 Jul 2020)

After a cyclist rode two abreast he followed the woman motorist and shouted abuse after she hooted at him:

https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/angry-cyclist-leaves-pregnant-driver-4330525


----------



## steveindenmark (20 Jul 2020)

Well he wont forget this in a hurry. The fact that she is pregnant is immaterial. He wasnt to know that. But there was no call for his ranting. I bet he regrets it now


----------



## BigMeatball (20 Jul 2020)

Although legally entitled to ride in the middle of the road, he was an absolute a55hole for behaving the way he did.

Good manners are free. I wondered if he'd be so arrogant if instead of a woman there was a big scary dude at the wheel. I doubt it 

I hope they track him down and make him pay the damages to the car. Gives a bad reputation to us all.


----------



## Specialeyes (20 Jul 2020)

For once, I'll tip my hat to the local paper here - they do repeatedly point out that the cyclist was initially in the right, and even put inverted commas around "holding cars up".


----------



## Cycleops (20 Jul 2020)

Agreed, disgusting behaviour and it gets other cyclists a bad name.
I'm left wondering if Ron Pickering has taken up cycling?


----------



## Drago (20 Jul 2020)

His behaviour was disgraceful. Nevertheless, this shows the effect of unintended consequences - if you're pregnant and don't like being shouted at, then don't bark your horn at cyclists who are proceeding lawfully and minding their own business. Think before sticking your nose in.

They're both as bad as each other.


----------



## Dayvo (20 Jul 2020)

Cycleops said:


> Agreed, disgusting behaviour and it gets other cyclists a bad name.
> I'm left wondering if Ron Pickering has taken up cycling?


Who?


----------



## Vantage (20 Jul 2020)

His aggression is probably overkill, but how do we know he hasn't had a crap day with other drivers acting like nobs? 
I've been that angry in the past after a series of poor/selfish passes and other road fu**ery from drivers. 
It's all too easy to get wound up about it.


----------



## Drago (20 Jul 2020)

On a happier note, on my afternoon ride around the forest I encountered a lady coming the other way. I was just about to dismount and let her come by when she stepped of the path and let me past. I touched the brim of my baseball cap, turned on my winning smile, and said "thank you, Madam" as I trundled by, and she beamed back at me. It's that easy - anyone, regardless of transport mode, that can't manage a bit of civility should be allowed out in public.


----------



## raleighnut (20 Jul 2020)

Both as bad as each other but as for the scratches and dents 'after' the recording ended.  havin' a giraffe.


----------



## Slick (20 Jul 2020)

raleighnut said:


> Both as bad as each other but as for the scratches and dents 'after' the recording ended.  havin' a giraffe.


Who knows how true that is though.


----------



## AndyRM (20 Jul 2020)

Probably 60/40 in favour of the cyclist being the bigger twat.

I like how she's angled the picture of the scratch to highlight just how pregnant she is.


----------



## BigMeatball (20 Jul 2020)

raleighnut said:


> Both as bad as each other but as for the scratches and dents 'after' the recording ended.  havin' a giraffe.



it does indeed look a bit suspicious how the person recorded the whole bit when the cyclist was being a rude tw@t but there are no recordings of when he was allegedly damaging the car.

We'll never know but he might have done it right enough, he certainly looks like one of those low iq individuals who would do such thing.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (20 Jul 2020)

There are zero recordings of the horn use and zero recordings of any damage being done.

Perhaps the riders reaction was perfectly valid


----------



## davidphilips (20 Jul 2020)

Maybe the cyclists reaction was justified and maybe not? but view i take is the motorist was wrong and started it, so any upset they received they asked for, wonder how many times they have upset cyclists and got of with it? So again only my view but well done cyclist even if it was a bit over the top, maybe driver will think twice before repeating there actions.


----------



## flake99please (20 Jul 2020)

I wonder if the cyclist would have been so aggressive if the car were full of bodybuilders. Nasty bully.


----------



## Vantage (20 Jul 2020)

Ah that's right. 
If a big guy with pumped muscles cuts us up in his white van we're to say nothing? 
Don't think so. 
People in the wrong gobbing off need putting right regardless of size.


----------



## snorri (20 Jul 2020)

Dayvo said:


> Who?


RON PICKERING!
ffs Dayvo.


----------



## Drago (20 Jul 2020)

flake99please said:


> I wonder if the cyclist would have been so aggressive if the car were full of bodybuilders. Nasty bully.


Similarly, would she have been so horn happy if Hulk Hogan had been riding the bike?


----------



## winjim (20 Jul 2020)

I'm quite impressed by how he seemingly managed to ride two abreast all by himself.


----------



## snorri (20 Jul 2020)

BigMeatball said:


> he certainly looks like one of those low iq individuals who would do such thing.


Pity the cyclist didn't have a camera so that we could have seen her face in order to make a character assessment.


----------



## Twilkes (20 Jul 2020)

Drago said:


> On a happier note, on my afternoon ride around the forest I encountered a lady coming the other way. I was just about to dismount and let her come by when she stepped of the path and let me past. I touched the brim of my baseball cap, turned on my winning smile, and said "thank you, Madam" as I trundled by, and she beamed back at me. It's that easy - anyone, regardless of transport mode, that can't manage a bit of civility should be allowed out in public.


----------



## Gunk (20 Jul 2020)

BigMeatball said:


> Although legally entitled to ride in the middle of the road, he was an absolute a55hole for behaving the way he did



Cyclists get confused about this, rule 66 of the Highway Code states:


never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends
So there is not an automatic right to ride two abreast, only where conditions allow.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (20 Jul 2020)

Based on whose definition of narrow, busy and bendy?

It's bollocks advice


----------



## winjim (20 Jul 2020)

Gunk said:


> Cyclists get confused about this, rule 66 of the Highway Code states:
> 
> 
> never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends
> So there is not an automatic right to ride two abreast, only where conditions allow.


You have the right to do it, other people have the right to ask you to stop, you have the right to tell them to bog off.


----------



## Bazzer (20 Jul 2020)

Rule 66 says should not must.


----------



## boydj (20 Jul 2020)

Well, she started it! He's a bit uncouth, but then we don't know how closely he was passed and what got his adrenaline going. It could be he's got a short fuse, or there could be more than just a bit of horn involved.

As for the scratches, I don't see how they could have happened when he is between his bike and the car in the bit of the confrontation that we can see.


----------



## Drago (20 Jul 2020)

Gunk said:


> Cyclists get confused about this, rule 66 of the Highway Code states:
> 
> 
> never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends
> So there is not an automatic right to ride two abreast, only where conditions allow.


Similarly, there is no rule that permits drivers to use the horn as anything other than a warning device.


----------



## BigMeatball (20 Jul 2020)

Vantage said:


> Ah that's right.
> If a big guy with pumped muscles cuts us up in his white van we're to say nothing?
> Don't think so.
> People in the wrong gobbing off need putting right regardless of size.



Yes, but I'm sure the cyclist's behaviour would have been different and more civilized. He would have given the same message, but in a more polite way. 

In this situation instead, given he saw a woman at the wheel, he felt like he could get away with raising his voice and behaving like a high school bully.


----------



## steveindenmark (20 Jul 2020)

Vantage said:


> His aggression is probably overkill, but how do we know he hasn't had a crap day with other drivers acting like nobs?
> I've been that angry in the past after a series of poor/selfish passes and other road fu**ery from drivers.
> It's all too easy to get wound up about it.


No. Its very easy NOT to get wound up about it. If I am still up on 2 wheels, you can beep at me all you want. I will just think you are a twxt. If you go off on one like the guy in the clip. You could end up on here. That guys life is going to be a misery for weeks. He will end up making a grovelling public apology and a feeble justification.


----------



## Cuchilo (20 Jul 2020)

The driver sounded hot .


----------



## davidphilips (20 Jul 2020)

steveindenmark said:


> No. Its very easy NOT to get wound up about it. If I am still up on 2 wheels, you can beep at me all you want. I will just think you are a twxt. If you go off on one like the guy in the clip. You could end up on here. That guys life is going to be a misery for weeks. He will end up making a grovelling public apology and a feeble justification.


Or he could just do a Dominic Cummings and say he has nothing to apologise for and just move on from it?


----------



## Vantage (20 Jul 2020)

steveindenmark said:


> No. Its very easy NOT to get wound up about it. If I am still up on 2 wheels, you can beep at me all you want. I will just think you are a twxt. If you go off on one like the guy in the clip. You could end up on here. That guys life is going to be a misery for weeks. He will end up making a grovelling public apology and a feeble justification.



Maybe you wouldn't snap in certain situations but other people do. It's called losing your temper. 
As I said earlier, we don't know exactly what happened prior to the video and we only have the lady and her friends word to go on. 
How many times have we heard from a motorist "It wasn't my fault. I did no wrong"?


----------



## Smokin Joe (20 Jul 2020)

Vantage said:


> Maybe you wouldn't snap in certain situations but other people do. It's called losing your temper.


If you lose your temper because somebody bips a horn at you then you've got a problem.


----------



## Vantage (20 Jul 2020)

Smokin Joe said:


> If you lose your temper because somebody bips a horn at you then you've got a problem.



Again, we don't know what else if anything happened along with or before the beeping. 
Other incidents may have lead up to the bubble bursting.


----------



## Cycleops (20 Jul 2020)

Cycleops said:


> I'm left wondering if Ron Pickering has taken up cycling?


You have to admit, there’s quite a similarity;


----------



## CXRAndy (20 Jul 2020)

Gunk said:


> Cyclists get confused about this, rule 66 of the Highway Code states:
> 
> 
> never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends
> So there is not an automatic right to ride two abreast, only where conditions allow.



One persons of conditions differ from another. 

I invariably ride in the middle of the road 95% of the time whether A/B or country lane, I move over to the left when I deem it safe for me.


----------



## Stephenite (21 Jul 2020)

Other Grimsby news names cyclist killed on straight road on a sunday morning:

https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/fatal-crash-cyclist-duncombe-street-2685904


----------



## Blue Hills (21 Jul 2020)

BigMeatball said:


> Although legally entitled to ride in the middle of the road, he was an absolute a55hole for behaving the way he did.
> 
> Good manners are free. I wondered if he'd be so arrogant if instead of a woman there was a big scary dude at the wheel. I doubt it
> 
> I hope they track him down and make him pay the damages to the car. Gives a bad reputation to us all.


Where's your evidence for the damage to the car?


----------



## Blue Hills (21 Jul 2020)

flake99please said:


> I wonder if the cyclist would have been so aggressive if the car were full of bodybuilders. Nasty bully.


Do you have a character profile of the woman?
Or any info on the nature of her honk at him?
There's friendly short hoots to let someone know you are there/coming thro, and then there's plain aggressive extended blasts. Which was it?
There's lots of bullies in the world.
Some of them, shock horror, are women.
Some of them are periodically pregnant.
Sorry, there's not enough info to go on in this story.

Personally I'm inclined to blame the terribly offended/social media hogging unborn child.
(Confession - i once chased down and shouted at a woman driving an elderly woman, very probably her dear old mum - she thought me mad i am sure but i felt in the right. More details available.)


----------



## Slick (21 Jul 2020)

Stephenite said:


> Other Grimsby news names cyclist killed on straight road on a sunday morning:
> 
> https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/fatal-crash-cyclist-duncombe-street-2685904


That's not great is it, I already have my suspicions about what happened that I'll keep to myself but it does illustrate who the real loser is when cyclists have to interact with some drivers and can explain why some react the way they do at times. 

Thoughts with the family.


----------



## Binka (21 Jul 2020)

We’re only seeing one side, which she has chosen to film and release. Maybe before she started filming she was stuck behind him honking her horn non stop, revving her engine and screaming abuse? The only thing I can say with certainty is that she was wrong saying he shouldn’t be in the middle of the carriageway.


----------



## BigMeatball (21 Jul 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> Where's your evidence for the damage to the car?



I said in another post that it does look a bit suspicious so keep quiet, ok?

So far it's only speculation and probably we'll never know the whole story but based on the limited recordings we've got, we can't say he's not at fault.


----------



## BigMeatball (21 Jul 2020)

Binka said:


> We’re only seeing one side, which she has chosen to film and release. Maybe before she started filming she was stuck behind him honking her horn non stop, revving her engine and screaming abuse? The only thing I can say with certainty is that she was wrong saying he shouldn’t be in the middle of the carriageway.



So, Just based on the recording that has been released, do you justify the cyclist's behaviour?


----------



## Drago (21 Jul 2020)

BigMeatball said:


> Yes, but I'm sure the cyclist's behaviour would have been different and more civilized. He would have given the same message, but in a more polite way.


What about the fat that the female driver felt it ok to misuse the horn because she was safely ensconced withing a tonne or more of metal? Would she have been so horn happy with a hulking great giant Haystacks type driving a Hummer? I think not.

This superiority-domination syndrome works both ways, not conveniently for one person and then not for another.


----------



## snorri (21 Jul 2020)

She's a baddun for sure, she noticed the cyclist had no helmet so assumed he had no camera to fall back on for defence.


----------



## BigMeatball (21 Jul 2020)

Drago said:


> What about the fat that the female driver felt it ok to misuse the horn because she was safely ensconced withing a tonne or more of metal? Would she have been so horn happy with a hulking great giant Haystacks type driving a Hummer? I think not.
> 
> This superiority-domination syndrome works both ways, not conveniently for one person and then not for another.



That's different: she didn't know she was misusing the horn.

On the other hand, the old tw@t on the bike knew that shouting and verbal abuse shouldn't be done, but ahead he went.

I really hope he gets what he deserves.


----------



## BigMeatball (21 Jul 2020)

snorri said:


> She's a baddun for sure, she noticed the cyclist had no helmet so assumed he had no camera to fall back on for defence.



non cyclists don't know much about these things: before I was a cyclist I didn't know you could have cameras and all this tech on your bike. So probably not the case here...


----------



## winjim (21 Jul 2020)

BigMeatball said:


> That's different: she didn't know she was misusing the horn.
> 
> On the other hand, the old tw@t on the bike knew that shouting and verbal abuse shouldn't be done, but ahead he went.
> 
> I really hope he gets what he deserves.


She literally had to pass an exam to prove that she did know what constitutes proper use of the horn. Her right to drive on the road is predicated on that knowledge.


----------



## mudsticks (21 Jul 2020)

I had almost diametrically opposite situation happen to me over twenty years ago - long before helmet or dash cams were a thing
(still haven't got one now tbh) 

I was cycling through our local town heavily pregnant, about two weeks off due date, and a nobber in a "let's off road" type 4wd tried to push past me in the narrows. 

I stopped and told him what I thought of his road 'skills' as any closer and he would have been physically pushing my back tyre. 

Of course it wasn't until I stood up off the bike that he noticed my 'condition' which I think took the wind out of his 'my vehicle's bigger than yours' petrol head sails (mix those metaphors baby.)

I didn't even bring the being pregnant bit up, it was obvious, and he shouldn't have been driving like that anyway, whoever was on the bike. 

But Just imagine the roasting he'd get on social media now?? 

Hopefully it made him think a bit, before he tried to muscle past another cyclist, who knows?? 

On balance it's best left to the authorities to judge these things properly, it must be so easy to edit films in your favour. 

But I guess having the chance of being caught on film being an utter @rshol _might _help with some anger management maybe.


----------



## BigMeatball (21 Jul 2020)

winjim said:


> She literally had to pass an exam to prove that she did know what constitutes proper use of the horn. Her right to drive on the road is predicated on that knowledge.



Did you know what cyclists were and were not allowed to do on the roads before you became a cyclist yourself?


----------



## nickyboy (21 Jul 2020)

Regardless of what cyclists are permitted to do, I really don't understand the mindset where you have two cyclists riding two abreast when there is a car behind

It is a nothing thing to single out, let them through and give them a quick raise of the hand as they pass

Costs the cyclist nothing to do this, everyone is happy sharing the road as a result. Of course you can say that cyclists are "entitled" to ride two abreast but, for a few seconds, maybe it's better to forget the entitlement argument and spread the road use love?


----------



## raleighnut (21 Jul 2020)

BigMeatball said:


> Did you know what cyclists were and were not allowed to do on the roads before you became a cyclist yourself?


Cycles are entitled to be on the road, Motor vehicles are only permitted after they've paid an annual fee (based on their level of pollution)
Bikes were around years before Cars, I think they got more 'self-entitled' when they abolished the bloke with the Red Flag walking in front to warn people that one of these fume belching monstrosities was approaching.


----------



## Drago (21 Jul 2020)

BigMeatball said:


> That's different: she didn't know she was misusing the horn.


She's the driver of a car on a public road - it is her absolute duty to observe all prevailing laws, and claiming ignorance is no defence. Claiming they didn't know never helped anyone else when they get caught stepping outside the law, so why do you thjink it makes her behaviour any more understandable or acceptable?

There's no argument, the cyclist was an absolute tool, but we need also make no mistake that this woman chose to set this chain of events in motion with her own impatience and unlawful behaviour. If she doesn't like consequences, then she needs to think before unnecessarily acting unlawfully.

no matter how minor the transgression, the law can only protect people who obey it themselves. Once you step outside of it in even the teensiest way you open up a Pandora's box of unpredictable consequences. I don't use my horn as anything other than a warning device and these things never happen to me. Conversely, I don't unload on car drivers so don't end up all over the media looking like a twunt. Like random molecules in a near vacuum, it was their own behaviour that brought two chumps together that day - not bad luck, not chance, not the divine almighty, but her own behaviour, his own behaviour.


----------



## winjim (21 Jul 2020)

BigMeatball said:


> Did you know what cyclists were and were not allowed to do on the roads before you became a cyclist yourself?


I familiarised myself with the contents of the highway code prior to taking my driving theory test and I have undertaken to keep myself up to date with it as part of the conditions of my licence to drive. Which is the entirety of the point I was making.

Her use of the horn was inappropriate and as a UK driving licence holder she should know that.


----------



## Inertia (21 Jul 2020)

nickyboy said:


> Regardless of what cyclists are permitted to do, I really don't understand the mindset where you have two cyclists riding two abreast when there is a car behind
> 
> It is a nothing thing to single out, let them through and give them a quick raise of the hand as they pass
> 
> Costs the cyclist nothing to do this, everyone is happy sharing the road as a result. Of course you can say that cyclists are "entitled" to ride two abreast but, for a few seconds, maybe it's better to forget the entitlement argument and spread the road use love?


I assume you mean where the cyclists actually block the road so there is no room for a car to pass? I agree there as Id rather not have an impatient driver behind me.

On the other hand, as long as there is room for a car to pass, I'm not going to single file for every car that wants to pass.


----------



## Blue Hills (21 Jul 2020)

BigMeatball said:


> I said in another post that it does look a bit suspicious so keep quiet, ok?
> 
> So far it's only speculation and probably we'll never know the whole story but based on the limited recordings we've got, we can't say he's not at fault.


Well i was working my way down the thread in order.
I think you need to decide what you think.
You'd be an unreliable witness in my book.
"Can't say he's not at fault".

?

Hardly damning.


----------



## Scottish Scrutineer (21 Jul 2020)

As Bazzer said above


> Rules 59-82
> *Rule 66*
> You *should*
> 
> ...





> Highway Code
> *Wording of The Highway Code*
> Many of the rules in the Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘*MUST/MUST NOT*’. In addition, the rule includes an abbreviated reference to the legislation which creates the offence. See an explanation of the abbreviations.


----------



## BigMeatball (21 Jul 2020)

I'll seat here waiting for the usual suspects to start with their "oh, but it says _should_ so it's not really a rule" entitled crap


----------



## Milkfloat (21 Jul 2020)

BigMeatball said:


> I'll seat here waiting for the usual suspects to start with their "oh, but it says _should_ so it's not really a rule" entitled crap


I am a bit confused as to why you are so invested in this? Surely you can see that nobody on this thread (including you) really knows what went on and that they both behaved badly, so why are you blaming the cyclist and making up that you know what the thoughts were of the driver?
As for the 'entitled crap', I am not sure how entitled it is to know and respect the law, I would have thought that it would be a prerequisite to function in life.


----------



## nickyboy (21 Jul 2020)

Inertia said:


> I assume you mean where the cyclists actually block the road so there is no room for a car to pass? I agree there as Id rather not have an impatient driver behind me.
> 
> On the other hand, as long as there is room for a car to pass, I'm not going to single file for every car that wants to pass.


Yes that's what I meant. I ride on a lot of relatively minor roads...Bs and unclassifieds so riding two abreast can make overtaking either difficult or impossible. We always single out when a car comes up behind; costs us nothing. If the road's particularly narrow it can be difficult to overtake even in single file. I'll ride as close to the edge as I can and wave them through if that happens

My attitude is if I can help keep everyone calm and friendly on the roads that can only benefit other road users, not just myself


----------



## glasgowcyclist (21 Jul 2020)

winjim said:


> I'm quite impressed by how he seemingly managed to ride two abreast all by himself.



I knew this photo would come in handy one day...


----------



## winjim (21 Jul 2020)

BigMeatball said:


> I'll seat here waiting for the usual suspects to start with their "oh, but it says _should_ so it's not really a rule" entitled crap


Hang on, you're saying that a motorist who has had to pass two tests and hold a licence can't be expected to know how to use her horn properly, but that cyclists have to strictly obey all the 'shoulds' in the highway code?


----------



## CH99 (21 Jul 2020)

BigMeatball said:


> I said in another post that it does look a bit suspicious so keep quiet, ok?
> 
> So far it's only speculation and probably we'll never know the whole story but based on the limited recordings we've got, we can't say he's not at fault.



Any chance you recently got a woman pregnant in the Cleethorpes area?


----------



## Solocle (21 Jul 2020)

glasgowcyclist said:


> I knew this photo would come in handy one day...
> 
> View attachment 537258


One of me doing the same...


----------



## CXRAndy (21 Jul 2020)

Solocle said:


> One of me doing the same...
> View attachment 537260




That's a better position, safer. 


And if a driver pisses you off, let bike drop into their path 😁


----------



## figbat (21 Jul 2020)

CXRAndy said:


> That's a better position, safer.
> 
> 
> And if a driver pisses you off, let bike drop into their path 😁


Funny, I immediately thought the other picture was better practice. In the horse world it's equivalent to what's known as "ride and lead" and when one does so one rides the offside animal and leads the unmounted beast on your left. This means that the horse under better control is the one in the road more.


----------



## Profpointy (21 Jul 2020)

glasgowcyclist said:


> I knew this photo would come in handy one day...
> 
> View attachment 537258



That's really irresponsible - he should be riding in single file shouldn't he ?


----------



## Milkfloat (21 Jul 2020)

Profpointy said:


> That's really irresponsible - he should be riding in single file shouldn't he ?


 With or without a wheelie?


----------



## winjim (21 Jul 2020)

Profpointy said:


> That's really irresponsible - he should be riding in single file shouldn't he ?


The circle is complete.


----------



## Drago (21 Jul 2020)

Oh, he's been outed and named in the gutter press. It seems he's not a bad man, apparently.

It also seems that the female driver is attributing damage to parts of her car to this chap that he never actually went near, so in addition to using the horn as a device for expressing frustration she's a fibber.


----------



## winjim (21 Jul 2020)

I just got round to watching the video. Is that it? I mean it's a bit sweary but given that I consider that sounding the horn is an act of aggression, I can't see anything that I think is disproportionate. OK he probably should have left it but so should she. Maybe I've missed a bit but I can't see that he's said anything which isn't basically true.


----------



## Solocle (21 Jul 2020)

CXRAndy said:


> That's a better position, safer.
> 
> 
> And if a driver pisses you off, let bike drop into their path 😁


To be honest, I might have been better on the other side, I only had a really cruddy back brake to use that way (although I wasn't going fast)! Then again, I'm left handed, so it was easier to control the bike that way around, especially given a couple of hills 

The red car actually annoyed me a bit by overtaking, before stopping behind the camera car, which was waiting for me (hence me having the footage). Cutting into my extended braking distance, so I just rolled past them, to an exclamation of "no f****g way mate!


----------



## Will Spin (21 Jul 2020)

It's a shame when something like this happens, it really gives pregnant women a bad name.


----------



## froze (21 Jul 2020)

But he rode two abreast, hmmm....


----------



## boydj (21 Jul 2020)

nickyboy said:


> Regardless of what cyclists are permitted to do, I really don't understand the mindset where you have two cyclists riding two abreast when there is a car behind
> 
> It is a nothing thing to single out, let them through and give them a quick raise of the hand as they pass
> 
> Costs the cyclist nothing to do this, everyone is happy sharing the road as a result. Of course you can say that cyclists are "entitled" to ride two abreast but, for a few seconds, maybe it's better to forget the entitlement argument and spread the road use love?



Cycling 2 abreast does not prevent overtakes when there is no oncoming traffic. And if there is oncoming traffic, there should be no overtaking even a single cyclist, unless the road is wider than average.


----------



## boydj (21 Jul 2020)

There was further info that he was riding 2-abreast with his wife and was subjected to a close pass as well as the horn abuse. Hence the anger, no doubt fuelled by adrenaline.


----------



## MarkF (21 Jul 2020)

boydj said:


> There was further info that he was riding 2-abreast with his wife and was subjected to a close pass as well as the horn abuse. Hence the anger, no doubt fuelled by adrenaline.



Flippin eck, I'd never calm down if I went off on one after every toot and/or close pass. It's no excuse for his behaviour IMO.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (21 Jul 2020)

MarkF said:


> Flippin eck, I'd never calm down if I went off on one after every toot and/or close pass.



There’s nothing to suggest the guy does either.


----------



## Slick (21 Jul 2020)

boydj said:


> There was further info that he was riding 2-abreast with his wife and was subjected to a close pass as well as the horn abuse. Hence the anger, no doubt fuelled by adrenaline.


That makes a bit more sense.


----------



## Binka (22 Jul 2020)

So she broke the law with a close pass.....shame he did have a camera. Local police reckon they’re cracking down on prosecuting for this.


----------



## nickyboy (22 Jul 2020)

boydj said:


> Cycling 2 abreast does not prevent overtakes when there is no oncoming traffic. And if there is oncoming traffic, there should be no overtaking even a single cyclist, unless the road is wider than average.


You see, this is where we differ in terms of our attitude to other road users. On B roads and unclassifieds it is often narrow and, if we rode two abreast there is no way a car could overtake so would be stuck behind us. That doesn't help anyone. So we single out and that allows enough space to overtake when the car driver can see the way ahead is clear. Of course, they pass relatively closely but it's no big deal and we all get on with what we are doing. The alternative is that the car drivers have to stay behind us for miles while we ride two abreast. I find it hard to believe that cyclists would do that rather than single out and let the car past


----------



## Blue Hills (22 Jul 2020)

boydj said:


> There was further info that he was riding 2-abreast with his





nickyboy said:


> You see, this is where we differ in terms of our attitude to other road users. On B roads and unclassifieds it is often narrow and, if we rode two abreast there is no way a car could overtake so would be stuck behind us. That doesn't help anyone. So we single out and that allows enough space to overtake when the car driver can see the way ahead is clear. Of course, they pass relatively closely but it's no big deal and we all get on with what we are doing. The alternative is that the car drivers have to stay behind us for miles while we ride two abreast. I find it hard to believe that cyclists would do that rather than single out and let the car past


I used to go on rides with a cyclist who for reasons best known to himself would actually deliberately block car drivers behind us. Plonker is the most polite word I would use about him. 
On narrow lanes I very often pull a bit over/ride slowly into a roadside gap to let a driver through even when riding singly.
Just being polite/showing good roadcraft.


----------



## DaveReading (22 Jul 2020)

boydj said:


> Cycling 2 abreast does not prevent overtakes when there is no oncoming traffic.



Sorry, but as a generalisation, that's nonsense.


----------



## figbat (22 Jul 2020)

DaveReading said:


> Sorry, but as a generalisation, that's nonsense.


On a two-lane highway it would be true - cyclists riding two-abreast are about as wide as a car. On a narrower road of course this becomes an issue.

I would tend to ride single file but in a dominant position if overtaking is not appropriate. As and when I can get out of the way, whether into a driveway, gateway, wide verge or whatever then I’ll do it. If I’m on my MTB on the road I’ll often hop onto the verge and keep going, almost always eliciting a wave of acknowledgement.


----------



## mudsticks (22 Jul 2020)

nickyboy said:


> You see, this is where we differ in terms of our attitude to other road users. On B roads and unclassifieds it is often narrow and, if we rode two abreast there is no way a car could overtake so would be stuck behind us. That doesn't help anyone. So we single out and that allows enough space to overtake when the car driver can see the way ahead is clear. Of course, they pass relatively closely but it's no big deal and we all get on with what we are doing. The alternative is that the car drivers have to stay behind us for miles while we ride two abreast. I find it hard to believe that cyclists would do that rather than single out and let the car past



I tend to agree - the majority of riding i do locally, is on what amounts to an average of one and a half widths worth of car space - with passing places - and lots of hills - i generally ride alone, but even in company its usually single file, and you snug up to the hedge - wave them on where you can to let people get through - if you _didn't_ do this in summer time when there are lots of visitors unused to narrow lanes, you'd end up with massive tailbacks of hot cross traffic - even if you are technically 'in the right' 

I'll often indicate my intentions to pull over at the next passing place / gateway, in case anyone is very impatient to get to beach before the sun goes down, and seems to be razzing on my back wheel, poor manners on their part - but they have to live with themselves the _whole_ time. 

All these random road sharing manoeuvres, are doubtless not in the highway code - but without them then cycling in Devon would be impossible - or at least amount to an endless series of confrontations. 

Sometimes I'll end up being stuck behind a car for several miles who isn't going any faster than a bike because they're having to pull over quite often to let oncoming traffic past, but personally I would rather that than have to ride 'defensively' the whole time to assert my official 'highway code rights'

- Lifes too short - and some people do seem keen to hasten themselves into an early grave - either through stress, or bad driving - i'm not keen to join them..


----------



## boydj (22 Jul 2020)

nickyboy said:


> You see, this is where we differ in terms of our attitude to other road users. On B roads and unclassifieds it is often narrow and, if we rode two abreast there is no way a car could overtake so would be stuck behind us. That doesn't help anyone. So we single out and that allows enough space to overtake when the car driver can see the way ahead is clear. Of course, they pass relatively closely but it's no big deal and we all get on with what we are doing. The alternative is that the car drivers have to stay behind us for miles while we ride two abreast. I find it hard to believe that cyclists would do that rather than single out and let the car past



Our positions are actually quite similar. On narrow roads, clearly it would be discourteous not to single out once it is safe to do so. When a route takes me onto a single-track road and a car comes up behind, then I'll let the driver know that I'll pull over to make room for a pass at the next opportunity. I'm not deliberately going to hold up a driver for no reason, but my convenience beats the driver's convenience and I'm not going to dive into the gutter to make an overtake possible when there's oncoming traffic.

However, on normal A and B roads I'll be very wary of leaving space which might tempt a driver to pass when there's oncoming traffic and insufficient space for this to happen safely.


----------



## Vantage (23 Jul 2020)

Depends on the conditions. I'm sure we've all been through this before but, if it's safe to let them past and doesn't impede my own progress too much I'll either single out or pull in where safe to let them past. 
If the road is narrow, twisty, up and down and there's nowhere for me to wait safely, then they can bloody well wait behind me until the conditions are more favorable. 
I don't care how long the queue behind is or how many are being held up. They're in a steel box surrounded by airbags and strapped in by seat belts. I'm not.


----------



## AuroraSaab (24 Jul 2020)

Vantage said:


> Maybe you wouldn't snap in certain situations but other people do. It's called losing your temper.
> As I said earlier, we don't know exactly what happened prior to the video and we only have the lady and her friends word to go on.
> How many times have we heard from a motorist "It wasn't my fault. I did no wrong"?



Losing your temper is a choice. You make a decision to react in that way. We could all speculate on what might have happened but as we don't have any other evidence we can only comment on what we can see - which a man acting very, very aggressively and calling someone a f**king c*nt. There's really no excuse for his behaviour.


----------



## CXRAndy (24 Jul 2020)

AuroraSaab said:


> Losing your temper is a choice. You make a decision to react in that way. We could all speculate on what might have happened but as we don't have any other evidence we can only comment on what we can see - which a man acting very, very aggressively and calling someone a f**king c*nt. There's really no excuse for his behaviour.



I Don't know, when fight or flight adrenaline kicks in, just about anything can happen


----------



## wajc (24 Jul 2020)

AuroraSaab said:


> Losing your temper is a choice. You make a decision to react in that way. We could all speculate on what might have happened but as we don't have any other evidence *we can only comment on what we can see* - which a man acting very, very aggressively and calling someone a f**king c*nt. There's really no excuse for his behaviour.



That's the problem, we haven't seen the whole picture. We can neither say his behaviour is excusable or not.


----------



## Blue Hills (24 Jul 2020)

AuroraSaab said:


> Losing your temper is a choice. You make a decision to react in that way. We could all speculate on what might have happened but as we don't have any other evidence we can only comment on what we can see - which a man acting very, very aggressively and calling someone a f**king c*nt. There's really no excuse for his behaviour.


Meanwhile, back on earth.


----------



## mudsticks (24 Jul 2020)

AuroraSaab said:


> Losing your temper is a choice. You make a decision to react in that way. We could all speculate on what might have happened but as we don't have any other evidence we can only comment on what we can see - which a man acting very, very aggressively and calling someone a f**king c*nt. There's really no excuse for his behaviour.



But it gets excused by saying stuff like

"The red mist came down"

We can all get annoyed or can even feel aggreived by other people's actions, and what we perceive as 'stupidity'
(cos of course we are always right)
But actively pursuing someone, and then behaving like this is pretty inexcusable.

That's not 'fight or flight' because the threat (if there was one) is no longer active - its 'retribution'.

It's not 'self defence' it's offence.



CXRAndy said:


> I Don't know, when fight or flight adrenaline kicks in, just about anything can happen



But its after the fact, he's not still being threatened.

Some people need to learn some anger management.

As @Saluki says we are ultimately responsible for our own actions, as adults, we shouldn't be out unsupervised if not able to behave ourselves.

Retaliating in direct self defence, when being threatened is one thing.

Giving someone a very aggressive 'piece of your mind' and being abusive like that after chasing them down is quite another.


----------



## wajc (25 Jul 2020)

mudsticks said:


> But it gets excused by saying stuff like
> 
> "The red mist came down"
> 
> ...



Grimsby Telegraph

Quote from the above article.

The cyclist reportedly “followed the car” into Cleethorpes Country Park 

Your description of his actions are very different from that in the report. 

We're told that the incident happened in Cleethorpes Country Park - the road up to the park is wide enough for a car to pass cyclists riding 2 abreast as you can see from Google Maps

Park Lane Cleethorpes

You can also see that at the park entrance the road narrows to a point where riding 2 abreast might indeed make it difficult for a following car to pass. 

Now I'm going to suggest it's highly likely (not definite I know but this part of the road is shown in the photo in the report) that it was along this narrowed part of the road that she became annoyed and decided to use her 'horn'.

A few days later we hear how she nearly knocked him and his wife off their bikes

Cyclists Reply

The distance between the park entrance and where the car is parked up (a dead end for cars but a way through in to the park for cyclists) is approx 200m. Therefore she would have been held up for a maximum of 200m or a few seconds.

Far from him 'actively persuing' or 'chasing them down' or even indeed following the car as suggested in the report, I put it that the car driver has literally just passed him and his wife causing them to fear being knocked off their bikes and then literally stopped and parked up in front of them. 

I'm not defending his subsequent rant - as you say the immediate danger was over but you give an impression of the incident that may not have occurred.


----------



## mudsticks (25 Jul 2020)

wajc said:


> Grimsby Telegraph
> 
> Quote from the above article.
> 
> ...



I wasn't disputing the incident - I didn't have the whole story of it - I was taking issue with his abuse, of the driver who was in the wrong to do what she did if the above story is correct. 

I've been in the cyclists position many times, crowded off the road by belligerent or thoughtless drivers. 

Or had obscenities shouted at me. 

But I've never behaved like he did to anyone else, however annoyed. 

And I don't think it's justified even now.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (25 Jul 2020)

mudsticks said:


> But actively pursuing someone,



Isn’t it quite likely the man and his wife were heading for the same park?


----------



## mudsticks (25 Jul 2020)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Isn’t it quite likely the man and his wife were heading for the same park?



Maybe they were, but that's a technicality. 

If the guy had approached the driver calmly, and explained why he had issue with her behaviour, then a far better outcome would have been achieved. 

I do get the annoyance and anger in the heat of the moment thing. 

I get angry several times a day, about all sorts of stuff. 

But I own it, and process it, and work out how best to deal with it. 

It's called being an adult, in charge of oneself. 

There's way too much justification given for violent speech and action ime. 

It doesn't help anything, it makes many people too scared to go out by themselves, or without some kind of 'weaponary' or 'protection' everything just escalates . 

I don't think saying it's OK on here is helping anything, either.


----------



## wajc (25 Jul 2020)

mudsticks said:


> I wasn't disputing the incident - I didn't have the whole story of it - I was taking issue with his abuse, of the driver who was in the wrong to do what she did if the above story is correct.
> 
> I've been in the cyclists position many times, crowded off the road by belligerent or thoughtless drivers.
> 
> ...



I wasn't saying you were disputing the incident - as you say you didn't have the whole story. Your use of the phrases 'actively persuing' and 'chased down' though can not be determined as fact but give a slant to the story that will see the cyclist in an even worse light - this is what I was calling out.



wajc said:


> *I'm not defending his subsequent rant* - as you say the immediate danger was over but you give an impression of the incident that may not have occurred.





mudsticks said:


> And I don't think it's justified even now.



Indeed like yourself I'd also have far more respect for him if he calmly stopped and explained why he thought her actions were wrong.


----------



## lane (25 Jul 2020)

Probably best accept if your a cyclist you are the bottom of the pile, subject to close passes and other life threatening acts by drivers on every trip and if you react back you are going to be castigated even by other cyclists.


----------



## Drago (25 Jul 2020)

Who cares? Nodder of a car driver + fat man with a Napoleon complex = 2 fools each getting no more than they deserve.


----------



## Blue Hills (25 Jul 2020)

Not being a saint as some appear to be, I'll continue as I am.

Sometimes let it go. Sometimes give a mouthful/a piece of my mind.

And always thank/acknowledge nice drivers - there are lots of them.

This incident in truth appears to be as much about the frequent toxicity of social media if anything.

If that driver was not as innocent as she would like to portray herself, making that initial posting was an act of extreme aggression in itself. Albeit playing the victim - a longstanding tactic by some that has unfortunately become all too rampant.

share the road folks


----------



## glasgowcyclist (25 Jul 2020)

mudsticks said:


> Maybe they were, but that's a technicality.



It’s more than a technicality. Your description puts a completely different complexion on the incident, not to mention being an assumption that, as far as I have seen, is unsupported. It‘s like me saying the driver deliberately close passed him.

I don’t know how justified his outburst was because we haven’t seen what caused it. He might have been making a mountain out of a molehill or he might have been genuinely apprehensive of severe injury.


----------



## lane (25 Jul 2020)

Blue Hills said:


> Not being a saint as some appear to be, I'll continue as I am.
> 
> Sometimes let it go. Sometimes give a mouthful/a piece of my mind.
> 
> ...



Spot on


----------



## RoadRider400 (25 Jul 2020)

Aside from the shouting and bickering over who was in the wrong, I have never understood why cyclists go two abreast to have a chit chat. Its just inconsiderate to drivers who will need to overtake on the wrong side of the road. On country lanes this can lead to some very dangerous overtakes. Fine if you are out at silly oclock in the morning go ahead but its very inconsiderate at other times.


----------



## DaveReading (25 Jul 2020)

RoadRider400 said:


> Aside from the shouting and bickering over who was in the wrong, I have never understood why cyclists go two abreast to have a chit chat. Its just inconsiderate to drivers who will need to overtake on the wrong side of the road.



As opposed to dangerously overtaking singled-out cyclists while unnecessarily aiming to stay on the same side of the road, you mean ?


----------



## Drago (25 Jul 2020)

Er, drivers should always overtake on the other side of the road. Assuming a run of the mill single carriageway, how is driver supposed to overtake a rider with the requisite 1.5 metre clearance if the driver does not intrude mostly or wholly onto the opposite side of the carriageway?


----------



## RoadRider400 (25 Jul 2020)

DaveReading said:


> As opposed to dangerously overtaking singled-out cyclists while unnecessarily aiming to stay on the same side of the road, you mean ?


Exactly


----------



## wajc (25 Jul 2020)

RoadRider400 said:


> Aside from the shouting and bickering over who was in the wrong, I have never understood why cyclists go two abreast to have a chit chat. Its just inconsiderate to drivers who will need to overtake on the wrong side of the road. On country lanes this can lead to some very dangerous overtakes. Fine if you are out at silly oclock in the morning go ahead but its very inconsiderate at other times.



Why cyclists ride side by side


----------



## RoadRider400 (25 Jul 2020)

wajc said:


> Why cyclists ride side by side



Yeah and I would not have an issue with that. If the selfish sods actually adhered to the highway code. Below extract of the highway code from your article.

"Rule 66 of the Highway Code only stipulating that cyclists should ride in single file “on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends.”"

Cycle side by side to your hearts content on wide straight roads. That isnt what most drivers take issue at.


----------



## Drago (25 Jul 2020)

Most drivers take issue at our mere existence. Stuff like 2 abreast riding is just an excuse for them to bleat and kick off, not a moral or legal justification.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (25 Jul 2020)

Can anyone quoting 66 actually define what a,

A) Narrow road is
B) Busy road is
C) Bendy road is

with actual numbers and reasoning.

TIA


----------



## mudsticks (25 Jul 2020)

glasgowcyclist said:


> It’s more than a technicality. Your description puts a completely different complexion on the incident, not to mention being an assumption that, as far as I have seen, is unsupported. It‘s like me saying the driver deliberately close passed him.
> 
> I don’t know how justified his outburst was because we haven’t seen what caused it. He might have been making a mountain out of a molehill or he might have been genuinely apprehensive of severe injury.



Oh I wasn't saying he didn't have reason to be scared or apprehensive at the time of the incident. 

Nor that the driver wasn't driving badly. 
It was his subsequent interaction with her, afterwards that I was taking issue with. 

He may have felt understandable anger, induced by fear. 

But shouting abuse like that doesn't help anything - not him - nor furthering the cause of better driving around cyclists. 

Still, I know its easier said than done some times to keep one's cool. 

But, there are some folks that dont seem to think we should even have to try. 

Anyhoo, I'm super chilled right now after 5 hrs out, one hot chocolate, one milky coffee, a lovely piece of squidgy chocolate cake, many hills, two beaches, a distanced meet up with old friends, a black lives matter vigil on the seafront, and generally patient drivers on the hills, and wide enough passes in the lanes. 

My new cycling buddy, has a Koga Hybrid btw.


----------



## DaveReading (25 Jul 2020)

RoadRider400 said:


> "Rule 66 of the Highway Code only stipulating that cyclists should ride in single file “on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends.”



Notwithstanding what the HC says, I'd suggest that facilitating overtaking by drivers on bends isn't an awfully good idea ...


----------



## HMS_Dave (25 Jul 2020)

If i were a driver and i am, i would not consider bringing up the HC, as frankly there are multiple discrepancies pertaining to the use of the horn, overtaking safely and the use of hand signals (of which a loosely gripped hand waving back and forth directed at other road users isn't recognised) that we can discuss that are not widely followed...


----------



## lane (25 Jul 2020)

Some drivers I don't know what to make of them. I was out with my son yesterday, single file, when a car decides to overtake. He gives us a really wide pass which is great (whole car right over onto the other carriageway) only problem is he can't see what is coming the other way. So he has to stop and wait for us to get in front so he can pull back in. He then follows us and waits until he can see and again gives us a really wide pass. He was really considerate passing cyclists which is great, but also a bit of a twat. I couldn't really make up my mind about him.

He was better than the car that overtook me then cut me up turning left as soon as he got past though. Or the car that close passed me on a narrow bridge and stopped just in front to turn right.


----------



## Solocle (27 Jul 2020)

Drago said:


> Er, drivers should always overtake on the other side of the road. Assuming a run of the mill single carriageway, how is driver supposed to overtake a rider with the requisite 1.5 metre clearance if the driver does not intrude mostly or wholly onto the opposite side of the carriageway?


In fact, I hate WS2 (wide single carriageway) layouts. The A354 is pictured.









This is wider than the typical single carriageway lane, but still not wide enough to enable safe overtaking in the lane (I believe these are often converted S3 layouts, which had a central overtaking lane, so overtaking requires the cooperation of oncoming motorists).

But the lane is wider, so riding in secondary doesn't have the same effect on motorists, and it's pretty hard to ride in primary on a primary route!


----------



## matticus (27 Jul 2020)

RoadRider400 said:


> Cycle side by side to your hearts content on wide straight roads. That isnt what most drivers take issue at.


I beg to differ! It's a regular occurence, getting abuse for exactly this


----------



## Profpointy (27 Jul 2020)

RoadRider400 said:


> Yeah and I would not have an issue with that. If the selfish sods actually adhered to the highway code. Below extract of the highway code from your article.
> 
> "Rule 66 of the Highway Code only stipulating that cyclists should ride in single file “on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends.”"
> 
> Cycle side by side to your hearts content on wide straight roads. That isnt what most drivers take issue at.



Just think for a minute about what you're advocating. Aren't you encouraging stupid overtakes on "narrow or busy roads" by doing what you suggest? If there isn't room for two abreast there likely isn't room for a safe overtake, particularly round a bend.

Fair enough on a one-and-a-half car width road, there's room for a sensible overtake (assuming the driver can see) if the cyclists single out. Likewise on a wide road where each lane is genuinely a car and and half wide. But on a narrow or windy road it's nuts for cars to squeeze past


----------



## lane (27 Jul 2020)

You have to think of it from the drivers point of view. Complains to me about them riding two abreast then complains to me about them being out when it is raining. Maybe they would complain whatever.


----------



## Milkfloat (27 Jul 2020)

I don't get drivers hatred of side by side riding, especially where the road is wide enough. 99.9% of cars have seats for two people side by side 100% of the time.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (27 Jul 2020)

Milkfloat said:


> I don't get drivers hatred of side by side riding, especially where the road is wide enough. 99.9% of cars have seats for two people side by side 100% of the time.


And 3 more in the back


----------



## Profpointy (27 Jul 2020)

Milkfloat said:


> I don't get drivers hatred of side by side riding, especially where the road is wide enough. 99.9% of cars have seats for two people side by side 100% of the time.



Yebbut they don't use the other seat so they still are in single file really


----------



## matticus (27 Jul 2020)

Profpointy said:


> Yebbut they don't use the other seat so they still are in single file really


SO WHY DO THEY SIT IN THE SEAT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD!?! They should sit on the left so that people can overtake more easily!


----------



## Profpointy (27 Jul 2020)

matticus said:


> SO WHY DO THEY SIT IN THE SEAT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD!?! They should sit on the left so that people can overtake more easily!



They are taking "primary" but when cyclists do it you never hear the end of it


----------

