# Is there any way to change the narrative?



## Sara_H (13 Sep 2015)

I had an experience today that was quite unpleasant. So I'll describe what happened to set the scene.

There's a local park that I ride through most days. Its allocated as a traffic free cycle route and is marked as such on the local authority cycle routes map.

Just inside the park is a bowling green. It seems that the bowling club members are allowed to drive into the park and drive on the footpaths to the clubhouse and park there. I assume this is because some of the bowling club members are elderly, I'm not aware that any other members of the public are allowed to drive in there.

As I was approaching the park gates today a car pulled into the gate and stopped part in the gateway and part with the rear end of her car on the pavement. The driver then put the hazard lights on. Because the car was slap bang in the middle of the gate I was forced to squeeze through a small gap on the drivers side. Of course, at this point the driver pulled away and only very narrowly avoided hitting me.

What shocked me most was the reaction. A fellow bowling club member hearing me shout (I'd shouted as she pulled away to "STOP") gave me a glare, and then told me that cyclists weren't allowed in the park, anyhow, you can imagine the rest, it all got very unpleasant and all the standard stuff was spouted - all cyclists are a menace, don't have a bell, don't have lights, are dangerous, should be banned from the roads etc. And isn't it amazing that even though such incidents are incredibly rare, everybody but me seems to know somebody who's been knocked over by cyclists?

After a couple of minutes of this I left him, but he followed me still ranting. At this point the driver is parking up, so I approached her and tried to have a reasonable discussion with her. She admitted that she had absolutely no idea about what had just happened but then proceeded to tell me that it was my fault because cycling isn't allowed in the park (it is) and that I shouldn't have tried to squeeze past her and that I should have waited for her to pull out - I kept calm and pointed out that I'd had to squeeze past as she was blocking the gate, and that I was in effect passing a stationary vehicle so had absolutely no idea if she was about to pull out or if she was planning to park there for 10 minutes and that I couldn't reasonably have been expected to wait to find out if she was planning to pull out. Her friend is absolutely vitriolic, spitting out unpleasantness along the usual lines.
By now more bowling club members are arriving, even though none of them have witnessed whats happened they're all very sure it was my fault and aren't shy in telling me and also reminding me that cycling isn't allowed in the park, yadda yadda yadda.

Anyway, what this incident and others has made me realise that if you scratch just a little beneath the surface of most average people in this country there's an absolutely vile hatred of cyclists that seems to be based on skewed perceptions and complete ignorance.
I've often scoffed at the parallels drawn between this and forms of bigotry, but after days like today it doesn't seem too far off.

So here I am completely shaken, not so much by the event itself but by the ugly attitudes of those around me today. So shaken that its 2am and I can't sleep so am writing this long winded post.

I just wondered if there's any hope of these attitudes ever turning around?


----------



## Gravity Aided (13 Sep 2015)

I don't know, but I think we are all due some new attitudes in the way in which we, as persons, deal with one another. I don't think it's any one country or another, as these attitudes seem the same in the States. Yes, there is hope of these attitudes turning around. Starting with each of us, because that is the one person we can control.


----------



## migrantwing (13 Sep 2015)

The majority of people in general are vile human beings


----------



## classic33 (13 Sep 2015)

I've had similar, tennis club, only I was close enough to return home & get a camera.
There was a No Motor Vehicles sign on the gates, which they chose to ignore. I'd had enough if their shouting the first time and just pointed the camera in their direction if they said anything. All the cars were photographed and formed part of the complaint made to the council. Two were even parked on the bowling green.

Just point out to them the number of vehicles (25%) currently on the roads in the UK illegally and what you see drivers doing everyday.


----------



## EltonFrog (13 Sep 2015)

You won't change attitudes, but I would write a formal letter of complaint to the club, and send a copy to whoever is responsible for the park.


----------



## summerdays (13 Sep 2015)

I think I would want to prove I was correct in that situation even if it was after the event. So how can you prove cycling is allowed? Is there a map showing the route or could you ask the council, or signs up showing you can use the park. 

I regularly cycle through a park that also has a bowling green in it (and tennis courts), but there is a short road that leads to a car park so I expect them where our patches cross. However the only way I could prove I could cycle there is the local cycling map, that I presume is backed up with the proper by-laws. I don't think I've seen a sign there saying it is permitted on the path that carries on from the car park.

If I came up with the proof, I might be tempted to photocopy it and flyer every car parked there next week!

As for the attitude, I think that people can react badly when they feel challenged, or defensive. Your description of her driving leaves me wondering if she is safe on the road, and maybe a little bit of her knows that. Either that or she's a cantankerous old bat


----------



## Racing roadkill (13 Sep 2015)

I'd have pointed out that they were super old, and were probably going to die soon, so wouldn't have to worry about cyclists for too much longer.


----------



## Brandane (13 Sep 2015)

The solution......


----------



## jefmcg (13 Sep 2015)

Change the narrative? We should all contribute to dementia and alzheimer's research.


----------



## jefmcg (13 Sep 2015)

If they are allowed to drive there, then it must be a carriageway, which means you are allowed to cycle there. 

I do love the attitude "you are not supposed to be there, so I can run you down." that's not only faulty logic, but an 8 year old pedestrian is clearly allowed to be there and would have been in equal danger


----------



## ufkacbln (13 Sep 2015)

Brandane said:


> The solution......




Perhaps eles drastic would be to tackle the original problem( See Classic 33's post)

First of all there is some concern thatthey are unaware it is an approved cycle facility

A polite email to the club with the details, and asking if they could correct the ignorance of heir members should deal with that, also ask thatthey deal with th e inconsiderat and illegal parking of their members


Being elderly or infirm is not an excuse. Even if a driver holds a Blue Badge, they are not allowed to park inconsideratley or dangerously. They can be ticketed for either, despite the badge. Equally the Council has a duty to enforce safe parking inthe area.

From the "Blue badge manual" (The Blue Badge scheme: rights and responsibilities in England)




> he Blue Badge is not a licence to park anywhere. Like other road users, you must obey the rules of the road, as laid out in the Highway Code.





> Safe andresponsible parking
> Do not park where it would endanger,
> inconvenience or obstruct pedestrians or
> other road users. Examples of dangerous
> ...



It may be that this is customary rather than with any approval.

Stopping their access and parking would be a sweet revenge



Speak to the Council about the issues being caused by the parking and use of the park


----------



## LocalLad (13 Sep 2015)

Life is short. If it were me, I'd have banged on the side of the car to let the driver know I were there (nothing aggressive, just to alert them to your presence), then ridden off.

The phrase that comes to mind is "never argue with an idiot...they'll drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience"

I can't see that any level of argument would help you in any way. If anything, they'll probably have a worse image of cyclists as a result of the argument, whereas they probably would have forgotten about you cycling away quite quickly.


----------



## byegad (13 Sep 2015)

CarlP said:


> You won't change attitudes, but I would write a formal letter of complaint to the club, and send a copy to whoever is responsible for the park.


Attach a Local Authority Cycle path map to your letter.


----------



## Tin Pot (13 Sep 2015)

There is no point in engaging strangers in discussion, it is guided by pride and territorialism, not facts and intellect.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (13 Sep 2015)

Complain to the council or whoever runs the park. Also direct to your local ward councillors. Email or letter and on social media - .@name. My local council is now more likely to pop into action if prompted this way.

You say cycling is allowed & I read cars appear to be a goodwill gesture to elderly users? If car use isn't strictly permitted demand that while you don't want to stop them having this perk, it MUST be used in a responsible manner that does not impede or upset other legitimate users of the park - wheelchair users, parents with pushchairs, blind or partially sighted persons etc as well as cyclist's. The council ono will have a hell of a lot more responsibility and regs on inclusivity and disabled access than to fit young bike riders or a grumpy gang bowlers abusing a perk.

Also see if the authority has a BUG or cycling forum that council members attend so that you can speak directly to them.

Lastly a word to the neighbourhood police team, asking if the local PCSOs can keep an eye on the park and parking when out round there to keep them to fair rules and the law.

You could write to the secretary of the bowling club or the local paper explaining how the dispicable bullying attitude of their membership reflectes badly on the impression and good name of their club AND point out that cycling is allowed in the park. but they sound like a bunch of bumholes so probably would take it as a challenge to upset any cyclists they encounter in there.


----------



## 13 rider (13 Sep 2015)

Like what @User9609 said check with the council go see they are allowed to park there just because they do does not mean they can . I d check with the council if cycling is allowed in the park then complain in writing To the bowling club and council . Or decide life to short and let it go its up to you


----------



## Ganymede (13 Sep 2015)

Sorry you had to deal with this - not nice.

I wouldn't go straight onto social media about it as that can escalate things too fast - keep your powder dry.

The bowls club will have some sort of formal relationship with the council which owns the park. I would say write to the council, both the transport section and the section responsible for the park, and copy in the chair of the bowls club. Particularly highlight how ignorant of park rules the members seem to be ("unaware" is probably the best word to use) and that this is concerning. Point out that it could have been a pedestrian in your place since the driver was not looking and there is no reason at all why someone would have squeezed past her improperly parked/waiting car. Keep it dispassionate but state clearly what an extremely unpleasant situation it was and that you were verbally insulted/shouted at and made to feel that you shouldn't be using the public amenity of the park _for no reason_.

Then see what happens. I really wouldn't leave it in this case, it's unacceptable, it's not just a random traffic incident but could affect your usage of your route in future.


----------



## Sara_H (13 Sep 2015)

Thank you every one for your replies. 
I was really shaken by what happened yesterday and couldn't sleep because of it, hence posting my long winded OP a silly o'clock in the morning. 
I'd already planned to speak to the council. I'd posted on a local community Facebook group that I'm a member of and another user said he'd had a similar problem about 10 minutes after me. 
I appreciate this may sound quite a petty thing to get upset about. In all honesty I think I'm at a funny age in life where I'm beginning to despair about the attitudes of my fellow human beings whether that be racism, mysogony or victim blaming of any kind. 

Though taxi drivers are fair game, obviously.


----------



## ClichéGuevara (13 Sep 2015)

As they're claiming she did no wrong, it would highlight the ridiculous nature of that claim if you park your car in the position the old woman had put hers in, and then just leave it there at the time they're most likely to want to pass through it.


----------



## Ganymede (13 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> Thank you every one for your replies.
> I was really shaken by what happened yesterday and couldn't sleep because of it, hence posting my long winded OP a silly o'clock in the morning.
> I'd already planned to speak to the council. I'd posted on a local community Facebook group that I'm a member of and another user said he'd had a similar problem about 10 minutes after me.
> I appreciate this may sound quite a petty thing to get upset about. In all honesty I think I'm at a funny age in life where I'm beginning to despair about the attitudes of my fellow human beings whether that be racism, mysogony or victim blaming of any kind.
> ...


Really useful that someone else experienced this so it can be established as not just a one-off problem.

I don't think it's a petty thing to get upset about. Confrontation from strangers is incredibly unsettling and upsetting, and I find that you sit there rolling it over and over in your mind and thinking of all the things that you SHOULD have said, and imagining what would have happened if it had got worse, and imagining getting your own back, and feeling stupid that you got into that situation, and then saying NO I am not stupid as it was them not me, and getting indignant, and wishing it hadn't happened, and JUST WANTING TO CRY. I would have been equally upset.

Remember you didn't do anything wrong. They are the agressors. The bloke who laid into you was completely out of order. He is not a gentleman, in fact he is a git. You had the bad luck to encounter him. Give yourself massive hugs from CC and don't let those horrid people ruin your day. In fact, every time you think about them, change your thoughts to something nice.


----------



## winjim (13 Sep 2015)

Which park was it? I bet bowling greens are great for doing skids.


----------



## Globalti (13 Sep 2015)

Your mistake was in stopping and wasting your breath on the old biddy.

My Mum is 85 and pretty competent and decisive and she takes pride in her driving but somehow her life is peppered by strange little incidents that happen to her in the car, some involving minor damage to the bodywork. She's never hurt anybody or caused an accident. For example she parked the car outside a church and somehow managed to get a rock jammed underneath it. Because she's not assertive she gets upset and it's not uncommon for her to be on the phone in tears with me at the other end patiently trying to work out what happened. It's old folk for you.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (13 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> Thank you every one for your replies.
> I was really shaken by what happened yesterday and couldn't sleep because of it, hence posting my long winded OP a silly o'clock in the morning.
> I'd already planned to speak to the council. I'd posted on a local community Facebook group that I'm a member of and another user said he'd had a similar problem about 10 minutes after me.
> I appreciate this may sound quite a petty thing to get upset about. In all honesty I think I'm at a funny age in life where I'm beginning to despair about the attitudes of my fellow human beings whether that be racism, mysogony or victim blaming of any kind.
> ...


Please don't think it is petty. They could well be local terrors that intimidate everyone not them. Parents and children etc.

They need to respect the rights of everyone and understand the privileges they have come with responsibility. 

@Ganymede I still think Social media now is for the best, not to rant or publically humiliate but used in a reasonable and sensible manner to engage with local users who may well have been having similar problems and too scared/ not sure how to address them. Sara 1:1 with authority would take longer and be taken lesa seriously than if authority gets to know quickly that they do have a wider concern on their hands that requires attention before somebody else has to suffer abuse or unpleasantness like Sara and someone else within minutes, hardly likely IMO to have been isolated blips.

I know a lot think farcebook and twatter and its just morons having scattergun rants, but used properly it is an effective and appropriate means of engaging corporate UK in a sensible conversation & can provide them a lot more good information in a very timely manner.


----------



## hopless500 (13 Sep 2015)

winjim said:


> Which park was it? I bet bowling greens are great for doing skids.


----------



## ayceejay (13 Sep 2015)

I had to yell at a guy the other day who was reversing out of his drive and aiming towards me, what ensued was a rant about his annoyance at me shouting that scared him but in his angry tirade there was no mention of my danger at all. I don't understand this attitude but cyclists are not seen as flesh and blood by some motorists


----------



## Crackle (13 Sep 2015)

Go back at night, with a shovel.


----------



## Crackle (13 Sep 2015)

I'd also like to add the story of my dog, when he was young, who once disrupted a whole match when I was walking back from school pickup past the bowling green. he liked to chase balls, still does but the right ones now.

Before I could even register where he was going or draw breath to call, he dashed onto the bowling green in hot pursuit of a nice yellow ball moving at pace, which he stopped but then saw another one moving out the corner of his eye and another and another. He pretty much ran them all down in the blink of an eye, disrupting five simultaneous games but none of the old fogeys was fast enough to stop him and the cries were ringing out as I managed to grab his passing form on the way to another ball and hall him quickly into the trees and away, chaos in my wake.

I wasn't so bothered as the lazy feckers used to park in a way which blocked a road and then climb over a park fence which was now broken, rather than walk the extra 20 yards to the entrance. I smile when I see people cycling across the green or playing football on it and the only people I spare a thought for are the groundsmen: Feck 'em.


----------



## Paul.G. (13 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> I had an experience today that was quite unpleasant. So I'll describe what happened to set the scene.
> 
> There's a local park that I ride through most days. Its allocated as a traffic free cycle route and is marked as such on the local authority cycle routes map.
> 
> ...


I'm afraid I would have just waited until the driver was out of site and let all the tyres down on her car. Not proud that I would react in such a way but that's what makes me, well, me!!


----------



## winjim (13 Sep 2015)

These revenge fantasies (mine included) are all a bit of fun, but they're not exactly an answer to the question posed in the thread title .


----------



## Dec66 (13 Sep 2015)

Go back after dark, with a plant sprayer filled with paraquat, and write "F**k off you silly old farts" all over their bowling green.

Sounds like it's the only language they understand.


----------



## PeteXXX (13 Sep 2015)

Get an Airzound and every time the cantankerous ones are about to chuck a ball down the grass, give them a blast of encouragement...


----------



## Brandane (13 Sep 2015)

winjim said:


> These revenge fantasies (mine included) are all a bit of fun, but they're not exactly an answer to the question posed in the thread title .


Probably because reality means the answer to the OP is simply "no", and it is only going to get worse. People are selfish in the main, and I have noticed over the last 53 years that everyone seems to think they are more important than everyone else. This seems to apply even more when cocooned by the relative anonymity and safety of a car. So we either get used to it and do our best to ignore it, or we get all stressed and go nuts. I used to do the latter, now I try mostly without success to do the former.


----------



## kiriyama (13 Sep 2015)

Brandane said:


> The solution......



I think a more subtle revenge is needed. The local paper will be printing the story of the phantom bowling green fouler who every night leaves a mysterious turd on the lawn...


----------



## migrantwing (13 Sep 2015)

...or take a HUGE dump in the middle of the bowling green. Invite your friends and family to take part, too


----------



## migrantwing (13 Sep 2015)

kiriyama said:


> I think a more subtle revenge is needed. The local paper will be printing the story of the phantom bowling green fouler who every night leaves a mysterious turd on the lawn...



Ahhh! You beat me to it. Lol!


----------



## Gravity Aided (13 Sep 2015)

Encourage the petanque team to come and play on their lawn. It's for bowls, isn't it?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5s9BpxOsOY4


----------



## Sara_H (13 Sep 2015)

Just been looking at the footage from my Fly6 camera. Doesn't show what happened as its rear facing, but obviously picks up some of the conversation.
The old fella who witnessed what happened, after hearing me shout, literally the first words out of his mouth are "You shouldn't be bloody riding in the park." That's his reaction to seeing someone almost get knocked over by an oblivious driver.


----------



## Drago (13 Sep 2015)

A big penis drawn with slow acting weedkiller on the bowling green should do it.

Ps, I'm joking - just fantasise about it, don't actually do it!


----------



## Profpointy (13 Sep 2015)

wasn't there something about hammering frozen sausages in the lawn - might have been on the dive forum


----------



## winjim (13 Sep 2015)

I have to say that I find all this talk of defacing their nice green with skids and turds and penises a bit crude. You need to show them that you are better than that. So how about you creep back under the cover of darkness, and plant them a lovely shrubbery or a flower garden. Right in the middle of the lawn. That'd be much nicer.


You'll need to assemble a crack team of guerilla gardeners...


----------



## NorthernDave (13 Sep 2015)

In my experience, the type of people who run these clubs lose all sense of reality and see their relationship with the council for a small part of the park as some sort of carte blanche to rule over the whole place as their own private fiefdom.
Keep your recording and follow the advice above - dispassionate comment in social media, factual correspondence with the council / police etc and when the club deny that the event ever happened (or give a version of events that bears no resemblance to yours) you have the recording to back up your case. Given what's happened so far, I doubt very much that the club members will ever admit they were in the wrong, but at least the park will be a slightly safer place.


----------



## ClichéGuevara (13 Sep 2015)

You could try a bit of reverse social media psychology, and write an anonymous letter to the local paper complaining about the problems you have as a pensioner trying to park within three feet of your bowling green.

My experience is that the replies are liable to be less than supportive.


----------



## bozmandb9 (13 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> I had an experience today that was quite unpleasant. So I'll describe what happened to set the scene.
> 
> There's a local park that I ride through most days. Its allocated as a traffic free cycle route and is marked as such on the local authority cycle routes map.
> 
> ...



I don't think it's so much that they hate cyclists, more just a tribe mentality. A similar thing could happen if a cyclist made a mistake in front of lots of other cyclists, most would take up his cause, without any knowledge of what's happened. I'm not saying cyclists aren't fair game to most people, just saying don't worry too much about it. It's more to do with plain stupidity and tribe mentality. Just look at motorists behaviour against each other, and realise some of them hate each other as much as they hate cyclists! Still it's their blood pressure/ heart condition/ karma!


----------



## Dan B (13 Sep 2015)

winjim said:


> I have to say that I find all this talk of defacing their nice green with skids and turds and penises a bit crude. You need to show them that you are better than that. So how about you creep back under the cover of darkness, and plant them a lovely shrubbery or a flower garden. Right in the middle of the lawn. That'd be much nicer.


That's a much more constructive idea. http://growersguidetocannabis.com/a-how-to-guide-to-guerilla-growing/ looks like a useful resource


----------



## Bazzer (13 Sep 2015)

Clarify your rights and if confirmed, if you feel the need as time will have passed, write to the club secretary.
Otherwise I'd just enforce my rights, remind others if similar circumstances arose again and console yourself that chances are you will be enjoying cycling long after their balls have stopped flattening the grass.


----------



## Sara_H (13 Sep 2015)

Bazzer said:


> Clarify your rights and if confirmed, if you feel the need as time will have passed, write to the club secretary.
> Otherwise I'd just enforce my rights, remind others if similar circumstances arose again and console myself that chances are you will be enjoying cycling long after their balls have stopped flattening the grass.


I did check on the map today - the path I was using is clearly marked as a traffic free route - which really begs the question of whether the bowling club members really are allowed to drive on there.
Interesting this assumption that cyclists aren't allowed to ride in the park. I've heard this said many, many times on the parks community facebook page. I always challenge this, and have people tell me that there are signs at every entrance to the park - there aren't, I've checked, but it really puzzles me as to why people assume this and are prepared to argue the toss about it, even going as far as to inventing imaginary signs.


----------



## midliferider (13 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> Thank you every one for your replies.
> I was really shaken by what happened yesterday and couldn't sleep because of it, hence posting my long winded OP a silly o'clock in the morning.
> I'd already planned to speak to the council. I'd posted on a local community Facebook group that I'm a member of and another user said he'd had a similar problem about 10 minutes after me.
> I appreciate this may sound quite a petty thing to get upset about. In all honesty* I think I'm at a funny age in life where I'm beginning to despair about the attitudes of my fellow human beings whether that be racism, mysogony or victim blaming of any kind. *
> ...


I have now passed that age and gone to the next.
I no longer shout and getting in to ineffective arguments as it does not usually provide a satisfactory response.
Now I am at a stage where I carefully gather evidence and make use of the what remains of our democratic legal system. It has provided me with immense satisfaction to win these little victories. I have become a professional complainer.
Therefore I suggest that you do the same as suggested by others except I do not expect a favourable response from the club secretary.


----------



## Bazzer (13 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> I did check on the map today - the path I was using is clearly marked as a traffic free route - which really begs the question of whether the bowling club members really are allowed to drive on there.
> Interesting this assumption that cyclists aren't allowed to ride in the park. I've heard this said many, many times on the parks community facebook page. I always challenge this, and have people tell me that there are signs at every entrance to the park - there aren't, I've checked, but it really puzzles me as to why people assume this and are prepared to argue the toss about it, even going as far as to inventing imaginary signs.



Perhaps contact the local council about the right to drive there, just to be clear? Whilst a map should be accurate, local bylaws might have changed.Once you know for certain, then see how you feel and may be see about having the law enforced, (assuming the map is correct).


----------



## classic33 (13 Sep 2015)

Dec66 said:


> Go back after dark, with a plant sprayer filled with *paraquat*, and write "F**k off you silly old farts" all over their bowling green.
> 
> Sounds like it's the only language they understand.


Trade name Gramoxone 250


----------



## Pat "5mph" (13 Sep 2015)

Uhmm, how come that those pensioners are fit enough to play ball games on the grass, but too fragile to walk from the approved car park?
I feel for you, often people that have never cycled in their lives think I'm responsible for all rl jumping cyclists in town!
If you have the energy and the time, I think you should pursue this.
Personally, I'd think very strange that driving in the park is allowed but cycling isn't.
What about kids on scooters or balance bikes? Let the pensioners run them over too?


----------



## Sara_H (13 Sep 2015)

Pat "5mph" said:


> Uhmm, how come that those pensioners are fit enough to play ball games on the grass, but too fragile to walk from the approved car park?
> I feel for you, often people that have never cycled in their lives think I'm responsible for all rl jumping cyclists in town!
> If you have the energy and the time, I think you should pursue this.
> Personally, I'd think very strange that driving in the park is allowed but cycling isn't.
> What about kids on scooters or balance bikes? Let the pensioners run them over too?


Cycling is allowed, but the old folk don't think it should be!


----------



## Pat "5mph" (13 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> Cycling is allowed, but the old folk don't think it should be!


According to old folk (hope I die before I get _that _old ) cyclists are a menace, should only be on the road.
Wonder if they change their tune if a member of their family is victim of a smidsy? Probably they would say, stop cycling, too dangerous!


----------



## Sara_H (13 Sep 2015)

Pat "5mph" said:


> According to old folk (hope I die before I get _that _old ) cyclists are a menace, should only be on the road.
> Wonder if they change their tune if a member of their family is victim of a smidsy? Probably they would say, stop cycling, too dangerous!


You're probably right. The whole episode was flabbergasting.


----------



## ufkacbln (13 Sep 2015)

midliferider said:


> I have now passed that age and gone to the next.
> I no longer shout and getting in to ineffective arguments as it does not usually provide a satisfactory response.
> Now I am at a stage where I carefully gather evidence and make use of the what remains of our democratic legal system. It has provided me with immense satisfaction to win these little victories. I have become a professional complainer.
> Therefore I suggest that you do the same as suggested by others except I do not expect a favourable response from the club secretary.




We had a major problem with a local cricket club setting upon the cycle path through a park

At best it became a slalom of abandoned kit bags, and at worst impassable due to sun loungers, scoring tables, and chairs set up on the path.

No longer, they have now discovered the acres of park they can sit and lie on.. it is worth following up


----------



## Dec66 (13 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> Cycling is allowed, but the old folk don't think it should be!


I once passed a gaggle of sneering coffin dodgers near Island Gardens, one of whom could not help but voice her displeasure at my existence, saying "look... there... there's another one..."

It was pointed out to her, by another member of her party, that I was within a marked cycling lane, on a public road. I was probably doing about 12mph as I was approaching the entry gates to the park.


----------



## Sara_H (13 Sep 2015)

Dec66 said:


> I once passed a gaggle of sneering coffin dodgers near Island Gardens, one of whom could not help but voice her displeasure at my existence, saying "look... there... there's another one..."
> 
> It was pointed out to her, by another member of her party, that I was within a marked cycling lane, on a public road. I was probably doing about 12mph as I was approaching the entry gates to the park.


They all hate us


----------



## classic33 (13 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> They all hate us


Jealous!


----------



## Broadside (13 Sep 2015)

I was on a family fun day cycle ride with my kids today, got chatting to another parent and even though he was cycling today he commented how annoying cyclists are and always getting in the way while he is driving. I, like you, despair.


----------



## mjr (14 Sep 2015)

Dec66 said:


> Go back after dark, with a plant sprayer filled with paraquat, and write "F**k off you silly old farts" all over their bowling green.
> 
> Sounds like it's the only language they understand.


I think a better message would be "Don't drive into my child". They won't go to the press with that, or if they do and try to conceal the message, an anonymous tip could reveal it (but if you send a digital photo, strip the metadata else they can ID the photographer).


----------



## Ganymede (14 Sep 2015)

Broadside said:


> I was on a family fun day cycle ride with my kids today, got chatting to another parent and even though he was cycling today he commented how annoying cyclists are and always getting in the way while he is driving. I, like you, despair.


Oh my god I've had this too, at the pub. A woman who was asking me all about my recumbent and going on how wonderful cycling is and THEN saying how annoying she finds cyclists when driving. I pointed out the disconnect and she agreed with me. Hopeless. I avoid her now.


----------



## Markymark (14 Sep 2015)

I had an argument with a toss-wipe on a bike steaming through the Olympic park. HE was tearing past families shouting "on-the-left" He even had a camera to relive what a twunt he was. I called him up on it at the lights. He said the map says it's a cycle path. I said no, it;s a shared path. He insisted it was a cycle-path and even though he agreed pedestrians could go on it, it meant he should be able to ride fast.

Complete twunt of the highest order. It makes no difference what a bit of paper says, you operate safely with what is around you. Even if cyclists are banned you do not put them in danger.


----------



## mjr (14 Sep 2015)

ayceejay said:


> I don't understand this attitude but cyclists are not seen as flesh and blood by some motorists


I think the media are mostly to blame. Now they can't be racist, sexist and various other ists, hating these people who wear clothes that non cyclists would never wear and ride on roads that most people are scared of, is one of the few Daily Hates that they can promote. Even if you do like wearing all the gear and belting along, please support any local publicity campaigns that show cycling as ordinary and encourages more people to start bimbling.


----------



## mjr (14 Sep 2015)

Pat "5mph" said:


> I feel for you, often people that have never cycled in their lives think I'm responsible for all rl jumping cyclists in town!
> ...
> What about kids on scooters or balance bikes? Let the pensioners run them over too?


Oh a rumour of near misses with children would probably change the narrative over the bowling green...

I sometimes get challenged about antisocial cycling but then I do speak to press and council promoting cycling so I do invite it. My usual responses are to say that I don't condone it but rules shouldn't be made on the basis of the few who break the current ones: rules should be made to benefit the law abiding - and speeding and uninsured motorists aren't accepted as an argument against new motorways, or pavement parkers accepted as an argument against new car parks. Worst case, a nobber on a bike is a nobber not in a car, while the majority of cyclists are decent honest law abiding people taking care of their health and easing pressures on local transport and pollution.


----------



## summerdays (14 Sep 2015)

0-markymark-0 said:


> I had an argument with a toss-wipe on a bike steaming through the Olympic park. HE was tearing past families shouting "on-the-left" He even had a camera to relive what a twunt he was. I called him up on it at the lights. He said the map says it's a cycle path. I said no, it;s a shared path. He insisted it was a cycle-path and even though he agreed pedestrians could go on it, it meant he should be able to ride fast.
> 
> Complete twunt of the highest order. It makes no difference what a bit of paper says, you operate safely with what is around you. Even if cyclists are banned you do not put them in danger.


I know someone like this .... first has a go at dog walkers being on the cycle tracks in Ashton Court, but I've found they all stood patiently off the side of the track when anybody comes along, then he posted a video on Facebook where he shows himself going down a flight of 100 + steps through a pedestrian area at speed, and almost takes out a pedestrian. Of the two I know which I think was more inconsiderate and dangerous. I've tried pointing out the inconsistency but he just doesn't see it!


----------



## ClichéGuevara (14 Sep 2015)

mjray said:


> I think the media are mostly to blame. Now they can't be racist, sexist and various other ists, hating these people who wear clothes that non cyclists would never wear and ride on roads that most people are scared of, is one of the few Daily Hates that they can promote. Even if you do like wearing all the gear and belting along, please support any local publicity campaigns that show cycling as ordinary and encourages more people to start bimbling.



The use of certain word forms to denote irrational hatred is part of the problem. 

Derogatory comments about race makes them a racist, derogatory comments about gender make them sexist, so derogatory comments a out cycling makes them a cyclist.


----------



## jefmcg (14 Sep 2015)

I hate this comparison. If you hate me on the basis of my race, gender, or sexuality then it is hate based on who I am. It you hate me because I ride a cycle, that's based on what I do. Completely different. 

You could compare hatred of cyclists with hatred based on religion because arguably that is a choice - though secular Jews are still hated as Jewish.


----------



## Profpointy (14 Sep 2015)

jefmcg said:


> I hate this comparison. If you hate me on the basis of my race, gender, or sexuality then it is hate based on who I am. It you hate me because I ride a cycle, that's based on what I do. Completely different.
> 
> You could compare hatred of cyclists with hatred based on religion because arguably that is a choice - though secular Jews are still hated as Jewish.



whilst that's perfectly true (in a way) I think a key point is not so much devaluing racism by the comparison, but that the "haters" are finding an "out" group to demonise. The bully picks on the black kid, the kid with the lisp, the ginger kid, or the kid who supports the wrong football team - anyone who can be labelled as "out"


----------



## jefmcg (14 Sep 2015)

As a woman who has experienced sexual assault, sexualised violence (very mild) and has been barred from applying for positions because the job, despite the stated duties indicating otherwise, needed a penis I would never compare sexism to people's irrational hatred of cyclists. 

I suspect almost everyone who makes these comparisons are white men.


----------



## Andrew_P (14 Sep 2015)

I remonstrated with a black cab driver for coming too close when we were both doing 20mph only he was wandering over the road as he was playing around on his phone satnav his response was "you lot are goby daffodils" I have had similar said to me before, people do not like being embarrassed by having their wrong doings pointed out so immediately go full on defensive even if they know they were in the wrong.


----------



## vickster (14 Sep 2015)

Andrew_P said:


> I remonstrated with a black cab driver for coming too close when we were both doing 20mph only he was wandering over the road as he was playing around on his phone satnav his response was "you lot are goby daffodils" I have had similar said to me before, people do not like being embarrassed by having their wrong doings pointed out so immediately go full on defensive even if they know they were in the wrong.


And black cab drivers are often ignorant, entitled daffodils. Public transport providers my arse!


----------



## mjr (14 Sep 2015)

jefmcg said:


> I hate this comparison. If you hate me on the basis of my race, gender, or sexuality then it is hate based on who I am. It you hate me because I ride a cycle, that's based on what I do. Completely different.


It wasn't a comparison because I agree that there's no comparison. I simply pointed out that many Daily Hates have moved on to activity-based prejudices because the old hatreds are now so toxic that mainstream media won't touch most of them. Unfortunately, rather than give up the poisonous politics of hate, they've just replaced some with others.

And it's usually not "based on what I do" - it's based on hating us because of what some other people cycling have done and we have no control over most of them. Nobbers are nobbers whether or not they're on a bike and there will probably always be some.


jefmcg said:


> I suspect almost everyone who makes these comparisons are white men.


So racist and sexist, then.  It doesn't matter what other protected characteristics I have, as long as I'm in the currently-privileged race and gender, then I may not speak out for equality and fairness.


----------



## ClichéGuevara (14 Sep 2015)

jefmcg said:


> As a woman who has experienced sexual assault, sexualised violence (very mild) and has been barred from applying for positions because the job, despite the stated duties indicating otherwise, needed a penis I would never compare sexism to people's irrational hatred of cyclists.
> 
> I suspect almost everyone who makes these comparisons are white men.



Not wanting to undervalue your argument, but it can work other ways too.

As someone that has worked in female dominated environments, I too have suffered what would be described as physical sexual assault and behaviour, but from women, and in a way that would not have been at all acceptable if the roles were reversed and one that will not be taken seriously if I complained.. Try asking a man seeking access, never mind custody of his children in a divorce if it's an equal society.


----------



## snorri (14 Sep 2015)

bozmandb9 said:


> I don't think it's so much that they hate cyclists, more just a tribe mentality.


Precisely!
There are parallels with the attitude of the bowlers and the Sportive riders in the "Nearly taken out by Sportive nutcases" thread.
As individuals most people behave reasonably, but get like minded people in a group and behaviour can easily change for the worse.


----------



## bonsaibilly (14 Sep 2015)

Sounds like a bunch of nothing to me, they're probably just used to their ways and it might have been more fruitful to wait, and enquire if they were stopping or heading in, rather than squeeze by and then shout out. And if then a dispute arose over cyclists (which it probably wouldn't have done) just pointed out the law entitled you to cycle there.

"I couldn't reasonably have been expected to wait to find out if she was planning to pull out". Perhaps not for "ten minutes" but that sounds like a disgruntled assumption rather than anything real, and you could reasonably have been expected to wait for twenty seconds or so and then ask politely... I reckon.

BB


----------



## Pope (14 Sep 2015)

migrantwing said:


> The majority of people in general are vile human beings



I strongly disagree. It's just that you don't often hear stories of people being civilised and courteous, because that is the norm.


----------



## Simpleton (14 Sep 2015)

Don't worry about changing attitudes as this is mostly down to ignorance and as someone once very clever said...''Don't argue with an idiot, as they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.''

Write to the council as mentioned.


----------



## Lemond (14 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> I had an experience today that was quite unpleasant. So I'll describe what happened to set the scene.
> 
> There's a local park that I ride through most days. Its allocated as a traffic free cycle route and is marked as such on the local authority cycle routes map.
> 
> ...



Change the narrative alright. Statements such as "if you scratch just a little beneath the surface of most average people in this country there's an absolutely vile hatred of cyclists" is just hysterical nonsense. This "them against us" attitude cannot be helpful.


----------



## Pale Rider (14 Sep 2015)

I can't fully grasp what happened from the OP, but it looks like a fairly standard cyclist/other road user disagreement.

It's a shame it happens, but I would put it in the same class as a puncture.

You can do without it, but it doesn't happen often, and it's a very minor bother in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## cd365 (14 Sep 2015)

I'd get my old heavy mountain bike out one wet night and have a ride on their green


----------



## User169 (14 Sep 2015)

bonsaibilly said:


> "I couldn't reasonably have been expected to wait to find out if she was planning to pull out". Perhaps not for "ten minutes" but that sounds like a disgruntled assumption rather than anything real, and you could reasonably have been expected to wait for twenty seconds or so and then ask politely... I reckon.
> 
> BB



I'm not sure it's wise to make too many assumptions about how a car driver is likely to act. However, surely the onus is on the driver to check that it's safe to move before doing so. If you want to operate dangerous machinery in public, you should be prepared to accept a high degree of responsibility for your actions.


----------



## bonsaibilly (14 Sep 2015)

Delftse Post said:


> I'm not sure it's wise to make too many assumptions about how a car driver is likely to act. However, surely the onus is on the driver to check that it's safe to move before doing so. If you want to operate dangerous machinery in public, you should be prepared to accept a high degree of responsibility for your actions.



Agreed, although if you know or assume you do from experience, the locale and the typical behaviour of the drivers there, it seems reasonable to anticipate or at least ride with a bit of patience. Particularly if it wasn't wilfully dangerous or threatening driving, which it doesn't seem like in this case.

It just reads a bit like the rider snuck through instead of waiting half a minute. You could discuss the rights and wrongs of it all day!
BB


----------



## Sara_H (14 Sep 2015)

bonsaibilly said:


> Sounds like a bunch of nothing to me, they're probably just used to their ways and it might have been more fruitful to wait, and enquire if they were stopping or heading in, rather than squeeze by and then shout out. And if then a dispute arose over cyclists (which it probably wouldn't have done) just pointed out the law entitled you to cycle there.
> 
> "I couldn't reasonably have been expected to wait to find out if she was planning to pull out". Perhaps not for "ten minutes" but that sounds like a disgruntled assumption rather than anything real, and you could reasonably have been expected to wait for twenty seconds or so and then ask politely... I reckon.
> 
> BB


Is that what you do every time you pass a stationary car then?


----------



## Hip Priest (14 Sep 2015)

I'd like to think people don't really have a vile hatred of cyclists. I reckon they were probably just siding with their bowling friend against a stranger, regardless of right & wrong.

It's not nice being ganged-up on, so I hope you feel better soon.


----------



## jonny jeez (14 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> Is that what you do every time you pass a stationary car then?


Sorry if this has been suggested already, but I don't have time to read all the thread.

I would decide how much this is worth to me, if it was worth a lot to try and change the bowling clubs bigoted views then I would gather some cycling friends...a big group...and pay a vist to their club next week. Tell them that you felt that they should see how it feels to be bullied by a growing group of people all refusing to see anyone's point of view, anxiety, fear and perspective...except their own.

Then proceed to act as selfishly as them by sitting on their bowling lawn and rounding on anyone who suggests that you should move

If you call the local rag first and inform them of a peaceful gathering is about to occur in protest of the bigoted views of the local bowling club, they will likely lap it up...its dripping with irony.

Who knows it'll either infuriate them and reinforce thier view of cyclists as hateful creatures who they should drive close to every day forever more, and tut when they see them at the lights

Or, if you Pull it off, it might just make them think...and perhaps make it into the papers.

Or


You can write them a letter and have it signed by as many people that you can...a petition if you will ...in support.


Or you can just burn the bowling club to the ground.


----------



## jonny jeez (14 Sep 2015)

Hip Priest said:


> I'd like to think people don't really have a vile hatred of cyclists. I reckon they were probably just siding with their bowling friend against a stranger, regardless of right & wrong.
> 
> It's not nice being ganged-up on, so I hope you feel better soon.


I'd like to as well and think that this is most likely the case.

Although I do suspect that, because we all act this way sometimes, that we all hide a vile hatred....of "others"


----------



## Pale Rider (14 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> Is that what you do every time you pass a stationary car then?



If I have to do a squeeze through, one question needs to be answered first.

Is the car likely to move?

Easiest way to bottom that one out is check if there's anyone in the driver's seat.

if there is, I want to be certain the driver is aware of me and my intentions before I start the manoeuvre.

That can be established by ringing the bell, eye contact, or tapping on the window - all of which I've done over the years.

It is no more than basic cycle craft.

Or, if that's what you want, it's an 'issue' about 'changing the narrative'.


----------



## Hip Priest (14 Sep 2015)

jonny jeez said:


> I'd like to as well and think that this is most likely the case.
> 
> Although I do suspect that, because we all act this way sometimes, that we all hide a vile hatred....of "others"



That's true. Tribalism.


----------



## Sara_H (14 Sep 2015)

Pale Rider said:


> If I have to do a squeeze through, one question needs to be answered first.
> 
> Is the car likely to move?
> 
> ...


The car was parked with hazard lights on. There was nothing to indicate an intention that she was about to move away. And as I was passing her from behind and my eyes aren't on telescopic stalks I'm at a loss to understand how you think I should have made eye contact with her?
As for tinkling my bell, well as she moved away I shouted, literally as loud as I could and she didn't hear me so I suspect a tinkle on the bell would not have had any effect. Do you tinkle your bell every time you pass a stationary parked car?
Essentially the main things that could have prevented this near miss were - her not parking in such a dangerous spot, her checking he mirrors before manouvering. Pretty basic driving,


----------



## 50000tears (14 Sep 2015)

To be fair Sara you did start the scenario with this.



Sara_H said:


> As I was approaching the park gates today a car pulled into the gate and stopped part in the gateway and part with the rear end of her car on the pavement. The driver then put the hazard lights on. Because the car was slap bang in the middle of the gate I was forced to squeeze through a small gap on the drivers side. Of course, at this point the driver pulled away and only very narrowly avoided hitting me.



This shows that you saw the car pull into the spot which makes it a whole lot different from a car that has been stationary for a while. Given its very poor positioning it seems highly likely that it would not be in that spot for more than a few seconds. The reaction you got was poor, but I think most wouldn't be squeezing through that gap unless there were certain the driver was aware of them.


----------



## Sara_H (14 Sep 2015)

50000tears said:


> To be fair Sara you did start the scenario with this.
> 
> 
> 
> This shows that you saw the car pull into the spot which makes it a whole lot different from a car that has been stationary for a while. Given its very poor positioning it seems highly likely that it would not be in that spot for more than a few seconds. The reaction you got was poor, but I think most wouldn't be squeezing through that gap unless there were certain the driver was aware of them.


Well, I think we'll have to agree to disagree. There wasn't any other way to get through, so I suspect most would have gone through.
As others have said, the onus of responsibility is on the driver to check before pulling away from a stationary position. Given that she was obstructing the entrance she should have anticipated that other park users might have been coming through. Thank goodness it was just me and not some children who probably wouldn't have known to slam on anchors and veer right out of the way as much as I could as I did (which essentially meant splatting myself against the gate post)
But if a group of people on a cycling forum can't refrain from victim blaming, then I guess we can't really expect the old dears in the bowling club to either.


----------



## 50000tears (14 Sep 2015)

Agree that we do disagree on this one. If they are so badly positioned as to block almost the whole entrance there I would hang back for few seconds to see if they were going to move and then proceed with extreme caution. Then again I have been knocked off this year through no fault of my own so perhaps more wary than others.


----------



## bonsaibilly (14 Sep 2015)

it depends on your definition of victim. I do understand you were shaken by the experience but the thing could have also been prevented if you had waited, which in the situation as described would have been reasonable to do, possibly even desirable.
BB


----------



## Sara_H (14 Sep 2015)

50000tears said:


> Agree that we do disagree on this one. If they are so badly positioned as to block almost the whole entrance there I would hang back for few seconds to see if they were going to move and then proceed with extreme caution. Then again I have been knocked off this year through no fault of my own so perhaps more wary than others.


Like you I've been knocked over, just over a year ago though in my case it was deliberate. I'm always extremely cautious - I was moving at snails pace, so plenty of opportunity for her to see me if she had looked.


----------



## cd365 (14 Sep 2015)

Hazards on tends to mean that they are stopped. Sara was correct in trying to squeeze past. Personally I might have rapped on the window and told the old bat to move.


----------



## Pale Rider (14 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> Essentially the main things that could have prevented this near miss were - her not parking in such a dangerous spot, her checking he mirrors before manouvering. Pretty basic driving,



You could have prevented the near miss very easily.

The driver was at fault, but that does not help you avoid injury, which should be your only concern.

Your cycle bell should be used as a warning in this instance, not as a reaction to her pulling away.

You say you could not make eye contact because you were behind, so get off the bike and tap on the window.

You took the risk of riding past unseen, and it nearly ended badly.

You were a wronged cyclist, but better to be one still cycling than one in hospital.


----------



## Mad Doug Biker (15 Sep 2015)

kiriyama said:


> I think a more subtle revenge is needed. The local paper will be printing the story of the phantom bowling green fouler who every night leaves a mysterious turd on the lawn...





migrantwing said:


> ...or take a HUGE dump in the middle of the bowling green. Invite your friends and family to take part, too



I can lend you Cindy if you like!



winjim said:


> I have to say that I find all this talk of defacing their nice green with skids and turds and penises a bit crude. You need to show them that you are better than that. So how about you creep back under the cover of darkness, and plant them a lovely shrubbery or a flower garden. Right in the middle of the lawn. That'd be much nicer.
> 
> You'll need to assemble a crack team of guerilla gardeners...



Problem is, if they have any form of CCTV, then you will be caught on film regardless of what you do..... So remember to wear a disguise! 



Andrew_P said:


> I remonstrated with a black cab driver for coming too close when we were both doing 20mph only he was wandering over the road as he was playing around on his phone satnav his response was* "you lot are goby daffodils".*



I would have found it somewhat funny if he had actually said that!! 

I then would have instantly wondered where he'd got the word as a form of insult from.


----------



## classic33 (15 Sep 2015)

Mad Doug Biker said:


> I can lend you Cindy if you like!
> 
> 
> *
> ...


Matt black, battery powered radio control Off-Road car, carrying a small tank with a tap & spell it out for them.


----------



## slowmotion (15 Sep 2015)

Some people are unpleasant. Unfortunate, but that is the reality. There isn't a law against being rude. Just let it go.


----------



## markharry66 (15 Sep 2015)

50000tears said:


> To be fair Sara you did start the scenario with this.
> 
> 
> 
> This shows that you saw the car pull into the spot which makes it a whole lot different from a car that has been stationary for a while. Given its very poor positioning it seems highly likely that it would not be in that spot for more than a few seconds. The reaction you got was poor, but I think most wouldn't be squeezing through that gap unless there were certain the driver was aware of them.



Absolute rubbish. She is blocking an entrance to a park. Before you move off from a park position the driver should ensure its safe to do so.
As its a public right of way access shouldnt be blocked. The driver probably had no right to park there in the first place.
As for nobbers joining in would point out that you shouldnt be parked up as your to fat and lazy to walk 200 yards into the park from a legal parking spot.


----------



## BEHMOTH66 (15 Sep 2015)

I have to agree with Sara_H here a lot of cyclist having ago, and then we wonder why others have a go???? She did nothing wrong, it may have not been the safest thing to do be she was put in that position by someone who had wrongly stopped blocking an exit/entrance. and then shouted at by someone who was not involved in the incident and probably didn't/couldn't have seen the occurrence. Sara_H did was she felt was the right thing to do. Personally I would be reporting this or I'd be enacting revenge


----------



## mjr (15 Sep 2015)

I wonder if some of the cyclists are criticising because this happened on a park route, rather than blocking lane one of an A road. Some act as if cyclists should either join a war on the roads or meekly bow to everyone and not expect fair sharing on designated cycle tracks.


----------



## mjr (15 Sep 2015)

Once again, I'm thinking that this happens only because cyclists are lovely and mostly harmless. If we were like cars and destroyed or seriously damaged most things we crash into, fewer would risk parking obstructing cycle routes. Even pedestrians get more respect because they're more able to scratch or sabotage things left in their way, without falling over.


----------



## 50000tears (15 Sep 2015)

markharry66 said:


> Absolute rubbish. She is blocking an entrance to a park. Before you move off from a park position the driver should ensure its safe to do so.
> As its a public right of way access shouldnt be blocked. The driver probably had no right to park there in the first place.
> As for nobbers joining in would point out that you shouldnt be parked up as your to fat and lazy to walk 200 yards into the park from a legal parking spot.



I have not suggested at any point that the driver was not in the wrong. Just pointing out that as she saw the driver arrive in that position that blocked her way it may have been more prudent to hold back for a few seconds before pushing through a narrow gap. I wouldn't squeeze through the gap because I know it is likely the driver will not check properly and could put me in danger. We all have far too much experience of drivers making poor decisions to rely on their judgement alone in keeping us safe.


It is not correct to just take a black and white view as to what is right and what is wrong, and what should or shouldn't happen. Life isn't like that.


----------



## Origamist (15 Sep 2015)

I'd write to the local/park authority about it. Ask if the bowling club has dispensation to use the (motor) traffic free route. If they do, ask the council to remind them of their responsibilities to other path users as you have recently had cause for concern about the inconsiderate/careless driving in the park by members of said club. Or you could write to the club secretary, or your local rag's letters page! Title it: "The Bowling Menace".


----------



## Accy cyclist (15 Sep 2015)

The trouble is there's that many lazy bastids these days they want to drive as close as possible to things. The local cemetery has a car park but it's rarely used as visitors drive right up to the graves so they don't have to walk a few yards. People are that lazy that they're prepared to wait an hour for someone to was their car while they sit in it. I cycled past a drive in car wash on Sunday and took note of the cars in the long queue. When i came back about an hour later the same cars were there waiting. They'd rather sit there for ages, than do it themselves. I


----------



## cd365 (15 Sep 2015)

50000tears said:


> I have not suggested at any point that the driver was not in the wrong. Just pointing out that as she saw the driver arrive in that position that blocked her way it may have been more prudent to hold back for a few seconds before pushing through a narrow gap. I wouldn't squeeze through the gap because I know it is likely the driver will not check properly and could put me in danger. We all have far too much experience of drivers making poor decisions to rely on their judgement alone in keeping us safe.
> 
> 
> It is not correct to just take a black and white view as to what is right and what is wrong, and what should or shouldn't happen. Life isn't like that.


Hold back for how long? The hazards were on, I would take that to mean they had stopped for a while, knew that they shouldn't be stopped there so had put the hazards on because that makes it OK to illegally park!


----------



## 50000tears (15 Sep 2015)

cd365 said:


> Hold back for how long? The hazards were on, I would take that to mean they had stopped for a while, knew that they shouldn't be stopped there so had put the hazards on because that makes it OK to illegally park!



At least a few seconds. Given their position of half on, half off a pavement and blocking an entrance, and that they only just arrived in that position suggests that despite the hazards they are likely to move again and probably forward. Even bad drivers don't tend to stay in a position quite that poor for any length of time.

It is a real pet peeve of mine when drivers park illegally and think that putting hazards on solves all. Drives me mad. The favourite of course is the stopping on double yellows made so much better by having two wheels on the pavement and hazards on.

Back on point though it is true that far too many older people make some horrible diving decisions and have zero awareness of what is outside of their tunnel view of the road. Almost every fatal accident in my area since I have been cycling is by an older driver, many of which should not be on the road as they have no spatial awareness. Relying on an older driver to make a shoulder check when they have already shown that they are a bad driver is akin to relying on a lottery win to pay your bills. It might happen but I wouldn't count on it.


----------



## BEHMOTH66 (15 Sep 2015)

50000tears said:


> At least a few seconds. Given their position of half on, half off a pavement and blocking an entrance, and that they only just arrived in that position suggests that despite the hazards they are likely to move again and probably forward. Even bad drivers don't tend to stay in a position quite that poor for any length of time.
> 
> It is a real pet peeve of mine when drivers park illegally and think that putting hazards on solves all. Drives me mad. The favourite of course is the stopping on double yellows made so much better by having two wheels on the pavement and hazards on.
> 
> Back on point though it is true that far too many older people make some horrible diving decisions and have zero awareness of what is outside of their tunnel view of the road. Almost every fatal accident in my area since I have been cycling is by an older driver, many of which should not be on the road as they have no spatial awareness. Relying on an older driver to make a shoulder check when they have already shown that they are a bad driver is akin to relying on a lottery win to pay your bills. It might happen but I wouldn't count on it.



If my Hazards are on I means ive stopped for more than a few seconds it means minutes at least


----------



## jefmcg (15 Sep 2015)

+1 hazards definitely indicate car has stopped for more than a moment. They also suggest that they are thinking of other drivers. I'd expect such a driver to be aware before moving off.


----------



## winjim (15 Sep 2015)

If my hazard lights are on it means that my car has broken down and I ain't going anywhere. There is no other use for them, save on the motorway, where they are used to warn of hazards ahead.


----------



## mjr (15 Sep 2015)

winjim said:


> If my hazard lights are on it means that my car has broken down and I ain't going anywhere. There is no other use for them, save on the motorway, where they are used to warn of hazards ahead.


You may also use them if you are stopped to give assistance at a crash. http://highwaycode.info/rule/283

They are absolutely not park-anywhere lights and are a quick way to attract the attention of parking enforcement officers around here - ostensibly to offer assistance but they're not slow to write a ticket if no assistance is needed!


----------



## 50000tears (15 Sep 2015)

Hopefully we all know what hazards mean and when they are correct to be used. But I am still not going to assume correct use from someone who has already shown very poor judgement.


----------



## liambauckham (15 Sep 2015)

I find it fascinating how the general consensus is to team up against cyclists. its almost as though seeing someone on a bike evokes a kind of insecurity i.e. im not fit.... they make me feel bad about being lazy etc etc.

all that shoot about "you dont pay road tax" well yeah i do. 

it always makes me chuckle when people thing paying taxes gives them a right to something..... we pay taxes because they make us its not a subscription


----------



## classic33 (15 Sep 2015)

50000tears said:


> Hopefully we all know what hazards mean and when they are correct to be used. But I am still not going to assume correct use from someone who has already shown very poor judgement.


How would you get past a stationary vehicle, that's illegaly parked and blocking an entrance then?
Waiting behind it isn't always the safest option. Nothing to indicate the drivers intended actions or that the person behind had even been seen.


----------



## Drago (15 Sep 2015)

So what if you didn't pay road tax? What's that got to do with motorists behaving like peckers?


----------



## Profpointy (15 Sep 2015)

Drago said:


> So what if you didn't pay road tax? What's that got to do with motorists behaving like peckers?



I undertand you're supposed to pay extra tax if you leave your car at home and cycle. Presumably it's more again if you walk.

Also motorists always give way to lorries, pulling over to let them past because they pay more tax


----------



## winjim (15 Sep 2015)

Rode tacks? That's a surefire way to get a puncture.


----------



## classic33 (15 Sep 2015)

winjim said:


> Rode tacks? That's a surefire way to get a puncture.


Or a pain in the backside.


----------



## Sara_H (15 Sep 2015)

classic33 said:


> How would you get past a stationary vehicle, that's illegaly parked and blocking an entrance then?
> Waiting behind it isn't always the safest option. Nothing to indicate the drivers intended actions or that the person behind had even been seen.


I'm interester to know how long people think I should have waited for.


----------



## Profpointy (15 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> I'm interester to know how long people think I should have waited for.



presumably she wouldn't have left it there more than an hour or two. People are so impatient these days


----------



## classic33 (15 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> I'm interester to know how long people think I should have waited for.


In the same situation, I'd have done more or less the same. I've said what I did in my case, being close enough to home.


----------



## glenn forger (15 Sep 2015)

Carefully paint the bowling green, use a stencil if you must, with weedkiller in the shape of a giant spaffing cock.


----------



## jefmcg (15 Sep 2015)

classic33 said:


> In the same situation, I'd have done more or less the same. I've said what I did in my case, being close enough to home.


Yes, and if you had rung a bell she'd have not heard it; if you had knocked on her window you would have frightened her, and probably angered the shouty man, who would have launched the same attack.


----------



## classic33 (15 Sep 2015)

jefmcg said:


> Yes, and if you had rung a bell she'd have not heard it; if you had knocked on her window you would have frightened her, and probably angered the shouty man, who would have launched the same attack.


End result being that she had to "push" past a stationary vehicle. I would not have remained behind a vehicle, parked as described, because I'd be uncertain if the driver was aware I was there. They may just reverse out.


----------



## classic33 (15 Sep 2015)

glenn forger said:


> Carefully paint the bowling green, use a stencil if you must, with weedkiller in the shape of a giant spaffing cock.


@drago got there first


----------



## glenn forger (15 Sep 2015)

drago didn't say anything about being careful or using stencils, his would look like this:







That's no good at all. Could be anything.


----------



## bonsaibilly (15 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> I'm interester to know how long people think I should have waited for.



Aifer minute.


----------



## classic33 (15 Sep 2015)

bonsaibilly said:


> Aifer minute.


And then what?


----------



## 50000tears (15 Sep 2015)

classic33 said:


> How would you get past a stationary vehicle, that's illegaly parked and blocking an entrance then?
> Waiting behind it isn't always the safest option. Nothing to indicate the drivers intended actions or that the person behind had even been seen.



I think I already covered this. The car just got into its blocking position so I am giving it a few seconds to see if it is going to clear the entrance then if not proceed with caution.


----------



## classic33 (15 Sep 2015)

50000tears said:


> I think I already covered this. The car just got into its blocking position so I am giving it a few seconds to see if it is going to clear the entrance then if not proceed with caution.


But you're happy to remain behind a vehicle, whose driver doesn't appear to know your there. Before squeezing past.


----------



## 50000tears (15 Sep 2015)

classic33 said:


> But you're happy to remain behind a vehicle, whose driver doesn't appear to know your there. Before squeezing past.



She was half on a pavement half on the road. Why would I be behind her? Giving her a few seconds doesn't involve me being anywhere near her bumper. Give me some credit not to be stupid enough to wait a few seconds in a dangerous spot.


----------



## classic33 (15 Sep 2015)

50000tears said:


> She was half on a pavement half on the road. Why would I be behind her? Giving her a few seconds doesn't involve me being anywhere near her bumper. Give me some credit not to be stupid enough to wait a few seconds in a dangerous spot.


What way would a vehicle turn/ be likely to turn, if it reversed out?


----------



## Sara_H (15 Sep 2015)

So, since I observed her in the spot for 30 seconds do I meet with approval then?


----------



## bonsaibilly (15 Sep 2015)

classic33 said:


> But you're happy to remain behind a vehicle, whose driver doesn't appear to know your there. Before squeezing past.



I must admit I don't know, and I cannot actually picture the setup in visual terms. But there are assumptions going on. That the driver doesn't appear to know I'm there doesn't mean they don't know, or won't if I hang back for a short time. I would hopefully have asked myself, where was I heading to that meant I had to get there in such a hurry, and if the answer were, well not anywhere dead urgent, then I'll just wait a while.

I mean it's a rubbish analogy but I was drifting along a path today (on foot) and suddenly I realised I'd walked past a dragonfly sitting in the middle of the path. It wasn't the first thing I saw but I did see it. I don't think anyone on Earth has a 100% track record of noticing everything going on around them within the first couple of seconds of any given situation.

Lastly, I want to observe that it seems a shame that in a thread like this, if a few people (cyclists) dared to mention that there were other ways through this scenario than some sort of virtual witch-hunt of drivers and/or bowling pensioners, they would be vilified as not being part of some "we're all in this together" gang of wronged cyclists.

BB


----------



## bonsaibilly (15 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> So, since I observed her in the spot for 30 seconds do I meet with approval then?



Come on, it's not a case of "approval". What did you want out of posting this thread in the first place? Universal solidarity against drivers? "Did I get it right?" Me: "No, I don't think so from what you said."

I just think that the scenario called for waiting up. Or you could have sidled up and asked what her intentions were. Or stopped and walked. Or whatever.

"But why should I?"

Indeed. It's your prerogative. That not everyone agrees with the decisions you took is theirs.

BB


----------



## 50000tears (15 Sep 2015)

Sara_H said:


> So, since I observed her in the spot for 30 seconds do I meet with approval then?



There is no need for approval I was just stating what I would do. As far as I can see waiting for a few seconds or not is down to choice and riders will differ in this, neither is necessarily the better option. As you waited 30 secs then it appears that you handled the situation as I would have. Another thread when there is disagreement, or none in this case, over minor detail where there is no right or wrong just options.

Classic33, Sara said the rear of the car was on the pavement so I still don't see a scenario in which I would be behind it. more likely I would have hung back so wouldn't be that close to the car at all. But as wasn't there no way to know for sure.


----------



## classic33 (15 Sep 2015)

Place yourself in a car, instead of on a bike, and ask yourself the same question. Then ask yourself the same question from a pedestian point of view. Forced to take to the road, between two vehicles, because one person thought it was okay for them to park illegally for their benefit.


----------



## classic33 (15 Sep 2015)

50000tears said:


> There is no need for approval I was just stating what I would do. As far as I can see waiting for a few seconds or not is down to choice and riders will differ in this, neither is necessarily the better option. As you waited 30 secs then it appears that you handled the situation as I would have. Another thread when there is disagreement, or none in this case, over minor detail where there is no right or wrong just options.
> 
> Classic33, Sara said the rear of the car was on the pavement so *I still don't see a scenario in which I would be behind it.* more likely I would have hung back so wouldn't be that close to the car at all. But as wasn't there no way to know for sure.


Your intention being to take the path now blocked with a car, whilst being on the road.


----------



## 50000tears (15 Sep 2015)

classic33 said:


> Place yourself in a car, instead of on a bike, and ask yourself the same question. Then ask yourself the same question from a pedestian point of view. Forced to take to the road, between two vehicles, because one person thought it was okay for them to park illegally for their benefit.



Why do you insist on continuing with this. Is waiting a few seconds so unreasonable to you? 

In a car I would presumably be forced to wait if another vehicle was blocking my way. I would probably swear to myself and sound the horn if they didn't look like they were going to move, so again a few seconds. As a pedestrian I guess I am on the pavement that the car is now sitting on. If I saw it arrive I would pass behind it quickly. I can easily see if the reverse lights are on so can make a quick decision to pass. If I am to enter the park I would probably ask her to move.

I have been clear throughout that the driver was completely in the wrong but that doesn't mean I am not going to take every precaution before gap squeezing.


----------



## 50000tears (15 Sep 2015)

classic33 said:


> Your intention being to take the path now blocked with a car, whilst being on the road.



What are you talking about? I would not be on the path at any point and have never suggested I would be.


----------



## bonsaibilly (15 Sep 2015)

classic33 said:


> Place yourself in a car, instead of on a bike, and ask yourself the same question. Then ask yourself the same question from a pedestian point of view. Forced to take to the road, between two vehicles, because one person thought it was okay for them to park illegally for their benefit.



I thought there was only one vehicle involved, but in any event assumptions were made that were at best 50/50 so yes, I would have hung back.


----------



## fossyant (15 Sep 2015)

Cyclists are the sludge of the world according to most. Got jumped by a lass at some lights near work, she ran red just to get to college 100 yards further on. This is what get's drivers.

I don't defend our silly folk, but I do say to colleagues, there are idiots everywhere !


----------



## classic33 (15 Sep 2015)

bonsaibilly said:


> I thought there was only one vehicle involved, but in any event assumptions were made that were at best 50/50 so yes, I would have hung back.


Is a bicycle not a vehicle in your eyes then?


----------



## bonsaibilly (16 Sep 2015)

classic33 said:


> Is a bicycle not a vehicle in your eyes then?



In your challenge you've replaced the cyclist with "a pedestian" so there is only one vehicle. Not that it makes a difference to my perspective on this. Assumptions were made. They turned out to be the wrong ones. The cyclist wants to be absolved of any responsibility. They can't handle an alternative reading of the situation so they try to belittle those who dare to suggest it.
BB


----------



## markharry66 (16 Sep 2015)

I have come to the conclusion as a cyclist we allow ourselfs to be mistreated. The point is quite simple its a public right of way.
Access should not be blocked. Its a public park not a parking space. I personally would have done the same.
The driver is responsible for their own driving and should have looked before pulling out.


----------



## Origamist (16 Sep 2015)

bonsaibilly said:


> Come on, it's not a case of "approval". What did you want out of posting this thread in the first place? Universal solidarity against drivers? "Did I get it right?" Me: "No, I don't think so from what you said."
> 
> *I just think that the scenario called for waiting up. Or you could have sidled up and asked what her intentions were. Or stopped and walked. Or whatever.*
> 
> ...



That's a counsel of perfection though.

If *you* had waited 20 secs and then the vehicle moved....*You* should have waited for longer... Why did *you *bother waiting at all...

You know how this line of argument goes: the reasonableness of "what ifs" keeps the internet cables whirring.


----------



## classic33 (16 Sep 2015)

bonsaibilly said:


> In your challenge you've replaced the cyclist with "a pedestian" so there is only one vehicle. Not that it makes a difference to my perspective on this. Assumptions were made. They turned out to be the wrong ones. The cyclist wants to be absolved of any responsibility. They can't handle an alternative reading of the situation so they try to belittle those who dare to suggest it.
> BB


Not quite true. If you're going to say I said something please note more than that was said.


----------



## jefmcg (17 Sep 2015)

If I was driving behind a car and it stopped blocking the roadway and put on hazard lights I'd assume that it was stopped for a while. It would not occur to me to wait behind, as the lights clearly indicate there is no immediate intention to move again. If there was room for me to safely squeeze past the car while it was stationary, I would do so. As I driver, I would be shocked if a car stopped in the carriage way, put on emergency lights and then moved again without even taking a shoulder check. 

That's all @Sara_H did. Can we stop blaming the victim here?


----------



## bonsaibilly (17 Sep 2015)

How can a car stop and block a roadway while at the same time allowing a following car to safely squeeze past? Either the roadway is blocked and squeezing past isn't safe, or the roadway isn't blocked. In any event the very concept of squeezing past suggests an awareness of heightened risk-taking.

I don't think anyone's blaming the cyclist per se - if anything the majority posters on the thread have been blaming/victimising/stereotyping/insulting the elderly driving community. It depends though if you define the cyclist as the victim in the given scenario. Which I don't.

In your scenario you also have: assumed this / would not occur to you that / if there was room I would safely squeeze etc etc. A lot of assumptions and case-specific decisions to be made. I think it was established earlier in the thread that the coming to a stop and employment of hazard lights in the location that it happened was an unusual and illegal parking and use of the hazard lights, so as a road-user encountering such a situation I would think that would give me enough sensory information to think "expect the unexpected here". Rather than, "tut, bloody pensioners parking up at the bowling club - oh well I'll just squeeze past without signalling my intent".
BB


----------



## classic33 (17 Sep 2015)

bonsaibilly said:


> How can a car stop and block a roadway while at the same time allowing a following car to safely squeeze past? Either the roadway is blocked and squeezing past isn't safe, or the roadway isn't blocked. In any event the very concept of squeezing past suggests an awareness of heightened risk-taking.
> 
> I don't think anyone's blaming the cyclist per se - if anything the majority posters on the thread have been blaming/victimising/stereotyping/insulting the elderly driving community. It depends though if you define the cyclist as the victim in the given scenario. Which I don't.
> 
> ...


Already said what I've done in similar circumstances, and that I'd do what the OP did with no hesitation.
I'm struggling to find anyone who said there was room for a car to get past as well as why you'd be happy to sit in the road behind a vehicle that may just reverse out on you.


----------



## jefmcg (17 Sep 2015)

bonsaibilly said:


> How can a car stop and block a roadway while at the same time allowing a following car to safely squeeze past? Either the roadway is blocked and squeezing past isn't safe, or the roadway isn't blocked. In any event the very concept of squeezing past suggests an awareness of heightened risk-taking.


 There is clearly a circumstance where a road is wide enough for a careful driver to move cautiously parked a stationary vehicle, but is not wide enough enough if both cars are moving.


----------



## bonsaibilly (17 Sep 2015)

jefmcg said:


> There is clearly a circumstance where a road is wide enough for a careful driver to move cautiously parked a stationary vehicle, but is not wide enough enough if both cars are moving.



It's not that clear but in any event we already know there is enough uncertainty in the given situation that to assume the driver will not be moving off equates to making a black and white decision about a scenario that is at best 50/50. Legally in the right or otherwise, you'll be the one driven into or open-doored while shouting out in vain, or you might get through and get to your destination a minute earlier, nursing a mild resentment towards pensioners. I'll be the one arriving a minute or two later with a calmed mind and a little more appreciation of my evenings ride.


----------



## classic33 (17 Sep 2015)

bonsaibilly said:


> It's not that clear but in any event we already know there is enough uncertainty in the given situation that to assume the driver will not be moving off equates to making a black and white decision about a scenario that is at best 50/50. Legally in the right or otherwise, you'll be the one driven into or open-doored while shouting out in vain, or you might get through and get to your destination a minute earlier, nursing a mild resentment towards pensioners. I'll be the one arriving a minute or two later with a calmed mind and a little more appreciation of my evenings ride.


So you'd be happy to stay in the road whilst the driver makes their mind up. On your vehicle.


----------



## bonsaibilly (17 Sep 2015)

Though there are several who won't accept that my point of view (and that of others too) is not the same as theirs. Hopefully the original poster will learn from their experience and not just expect everyone else to buck up.
BB


----------



## 50000tears (17 Sep 2015)

bonsaibilly said:


> It's not that clear but in any event we already know there is enough uncertainty in the given situation that to assume the driver will not be moving off equates to making a black and white decision about a scenario that is at best 50/50. Legally in the right or otherwise, you'll be the one driven into or open-doored while shouting out in vain, or you might get through and get to your destination a minute earlier, nursing a mild resentment towards pensioners. I'll be the one arriving a minute or two later with a calmed mind and a little more appreciation of my evenings ride.



Very well put. The forums are ruined by too many people who rufuse to see things other than in absolutes and will argue with different opinion. The fact that two riders might approach the same situation differently and neither be wrong is unfathonable to many.


----------



## classic33 (17 Sep 2015)

How one individual deals with a set of circumstances may not be how another would. I don't think anyone has said, or even expected, that theirs is the only way of dealing with it.


----------



## 50000tears (17 Sep 2015)

classic33 said:


> How one individual deals with a set of circumstances may not be how another would. I don't think anyone has said, or even expected, that theirs is the only way of dealing with it.



If that is the case then why have you, and others, derided and spoken down to anyone who found disagreement with the narrative version? 

You would faced with the situation described have gone through the narrow gap without hesitation, I would have been more wary of doing so. I ride with people who would wait and others who would probably not. That is their choice and I exercise mine. 

Life is all about choices but I do think the forum lets itself down when it fails to respect other views outside of an often very narrow viewpoint that they see as definitive. More often than not it is nothing but opinion. Yes you can argue a point of view but it is the lack of respect for opposing views which lets individual posters down.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2015)

50000tears said:


> If that is the case then why have you, and others, derided and spoken down to anyone who found disagreement with the narrative version?
> 
> You would faced with the situation described have gone through the narrow gap without hesitation, I would have been more wary of doing so. I ride with people who would wait and others who would probably not. That is their choice and I exercise mine.
> 
> Life is all about choices but I do think the forum lets itself down when it fails to respect other views outside of an often very narrow viewpoint that they see as definitive. More often than not it is nothing but opinion. Yes you can argue a point of view but it is the lack of respect for opposing views which lets individual posters down.


I have said exactly what I did in a similar situation, which is completely different to what anyone else said. 

That said I'd not be willing to wait, in the road, whilst a driver makes their mind up as to what they were going to do. I even asked if people would be willing to wait behind a vehicle, whose driver seemed unaware of the fact there was anything behind them. The simple reason being, they may just reverse out. Some appear quite happy to remain where they may not have been seen. I'm not one of them.

I speak for myself not the forum, or anyone else on this.


----------



## 50000tears (18 Sep 2015)

The assumption you make in questioning other people waiting is that they will be behind a car tha may suddenly be put in reverse. For me waiting does not mean I am sat anywhere near their bumper, nor will I be sat in the middle of the road if I have parked cars on my left. There are other options to sitting on the bumper when not proceeding straight through. I might hang back a few lengths or over take it without entering the park so I come at the park entrance at an angle where I am far more likely to be seen. Cannot say for certain unless I was there.

The main point I was trying to make was that a car in the middle of a gateway half on/off a pavement is probably not going to stay in that position long despite the hazards. People can argue that hazards means it is not going to move but the car position says otherwise, and with the driver in the car with the engine on I am not assuming anything. In my opinion the fact that it did move was not some freak occurrence that couldn't be anticipated but a very likely scenario.

Not victim bashing as suggested by another poster as the driver is clearly at fault, Sara was blameless IMO and have said that before.


----------



## Profpointy (18 Sep 2015)

50000tears said:


> The assumption you make in questioning other people waiting is that they will be behind a car tha may suddenly be put in reverse. For me waiting does not mean I am sat anywhere near their bumper, nor will I be sat in the middle of the road if I have parked cars on my left. There are other options to sitting on the bumper when not proceeding straight through. I might hang back a few lengths or over take it without entering the park so I come at the park entrance at an angle where I am far more likely to be seen. Cannot say for certain unless I was there.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Appologies for casting aspertions on your earier posts - albeit they did look a bit argumwntative, trollish even I'm afraid albeit not your intent. I see whatyou're getting at ie they could move off at any moment -but that said, someone parked up with hazards could be there a considerable time, typically is - else why put hazzards on, and is arguable as likely to reverse (into you) without looking as pull out without looking.

Anyhow, appologies for maligning your motives, although I still think your point is weak (in this case) even if (paraphrasing) "expect people to do something silly" isn't a bad counsel


----------



## Pale Rider (18 Sep 2015)

If cyclists want to 'change the narrative' they should stop characterising themselves as victims at every opportunity.

There is no victim here, just an inconsiderate driver and a cyclist who lacked the gumption to establish if a car might be about to move.


----------



## winjim (18 Sep 2015)

Pale Rider said:


> If cyclists want to 'change the narrative' they should stop characterising themselves as victims at every opportunity.
> 
> There is no victim here, just an inconsiderate driver and a cyclist who lacked the gumption to establish if a car might be about to move.


And an entire bowls club membership hurling abuse.


----------



## TheJDog (18 Sep 2015)

winjim said:


> And an entire bowls club membership hurling abuse.



Exactly. This is the key issue in my mind about this event. Sara didn't do anything wrong (maybe slighly misjudged by the comments of some people here :S), but was harangued by a whole load of people who were definitely in the wrong. Those are the people she should be seeking an apology from. Not just an apology, but assurances from the club that they'll ask their members to behave in the future. And make sure that they are all aware that cycling in the park is perfectly OK. And parking in the middle of an entrance is not OK.


----------



## glenn forger (18 Sep 2015)

Ask locally if this geriatric delinquent has previously been reported for aggressive driving.


----------



## Markymark (18 Sep 2015)

glenn forger said:


> Ask locally if this geriatric delinquent has previously been reported for aggressive driving.


Ask @Sara_H yourself.

Sorry


----------



## 50000tears (18 Sep 2015)

Profpointy said:


> Appologies for casting aspertions on your earier posts - albeit they did look a bit argumwntative, trollish even I'm afraid albeit not your intent. I see whatyou're getting at ie they could move off at any moment -but that said, someone parked up with hazards could be there a considerable time, typically is - else why put hazzards on, and is arguable as likely to reverse (into you) without looking as pull out without looking.
> 
> Anyhow, appologies for maligning your motives, although I still think your point is weak (in this case) even if (paraphrasing) "expect people to do something silly" isn't a bad counsel



It seems the key difference here is whether a car should be expected to stay stationary with the hazards on. The answer is clearly yes but I believe is heavily mitigated by the fact that they were part way through an entrance with the rest of the car on the pavement. The car is hardly parked and is in a position where nobody would want to remain for any length of time. So it moving was a real possibility and as it happens in the case it did happen.

I guess the perfect response would be to come alongside the car and tap on the window and ask if she had broken down and needed help. That way she knows you are there and you are effectively asking her to move (if she can) whilst coming across as a concerned passer by.

Hindsight is king though.


----------



## glenn forger (18 Sep 2015)

50000tears said:


> The car is hardly parked



It's in Hazard Light Limbo. That's why they're called Park Anywhere Lights. If your Hazard Lights are on everyone has to lie down and be quiet until you've finished.


----------



## summerdays (18 Sep 2015)

I saw a car parked on a residential street at 90 deg to the kerb (pointing towards a driveway that already had a car in it), ok I knew it was going nowhere (nobody in it), but it stayed that way with cars having to drive around it for the 10 mins I was chatting to a friend. Sometimes I wonder what goes through someone's head that they think that is ok even for a second!


----------



## Pale Rider (18 Sep 2015)

winjim said:


> And an entire bowls club membership hurling abuse.



Wish I was there - abusive crinklies could be a Monty Python sketch.


----------



## summerdays (18 Sep 2015)

User13710 said:


> A company doing renovations on a house near me have parked their Transit van like that every day for a couple of weeks.


Wow  unbelievable!

At that point I would have contacted the local PCSO for that area, he's often ticketing cars parked badly on his beat, it wouldn't have lasted the week! Unfortunately he seems to be the only one who seems to be active in dealing with bad parking but I couldn't be bothered for this hopefully short obstruction.


----------



## jefmcg (18 Sep 2015)

winjim said:


> And an entire bowls club membership hurling abuse.


This is the crux. She had a near miss with a car, and her brain for flooded with adrenaline and other neurotransmitters, ready for flight or fight. Then immediately afterwards, before she could file it away as "nothing major" or "lesson learnt" or however she was going to deal with it, while she was still reeling from that brief "is this how I am going to die?" moment, a person wholly uninvolved with the previous incident launched into a fierce attack on her _for nearly being killed_. A different personality might have responded to that toxic combination of brain chemistry and abuse with physical violence. I could imagine someone punching that man in the nose, and probably going to court for it. @Sara_H, bless her, bottled up her reaction, and it was still worrying at her hours/days later.

This is a classic case of not being able to change the situation, just how you react to it. Try to remember he is an old, angry man. He's probably lonely and he'll be dead soon. See if that cheers you up.


----------



## glenn forger (18 Sep 2015)

Maybe she could play with some kittens?


----------



## Sara_H (19 Sep 2015)

glenn forger said:


> Maybe she could play with some kittens?


Who me? I prefer puppies.


----------



## Hitchington (19 Sep 2015)

Objectivism. In contemporary Britain we are told that we are individuals who must provide for ourselves and our families and that anyone who can't are scroungers taking from "hard working families" blah, blah, etc, etc...
Wrongly, our success and wealth is measured on material and financial gain.
In some situations (like sharing road space) it appears that society has forgotten common values of decency, respect, empathy, community and the wealth of kindness. It's still there but spread thinly on the ground.
The conflicts which arise between car drivers and cyclists are a symptom of this overall problem. It took an event like 2012 London Olympics where society collectively owned the interest in cycling and the successes of our track and road teams for politeness and kindness to appear on the roads. This lasted a few weeks, then when the party was over it seems that everyone went back to their snarling angry selves; car driver v cyclist, taxi driver v motorcycle, bus v lorry, cyclist v pedestrian ....


----------



## glenn forger (19 Sep 2015)

Sometimes I feel like saying to a driver "Get to know me and you may hate me. At the moment you don't really hate me, you've been conditioned to hate people like me". So it's not just the defensiveness of people caught wrong-doing, it's the Pavlovian bile and aggression toward someone cos they happen to be on a bike. Much harder to cope with.


----------



## Lemond (19 Sep 2015)

Yet to find a driver that hates me or wants to do me harm.


----------



## glenn forger (19 Sep 2015)

Lemond said:


> Yet to find a driver that hates me or wants to do me harm.



You've been shown examples of people wishing death upon cyclists and you dismissed it as "hysterical nonsense", so you have been shown examples of this hatred, you just dismiss them for no clear reason.


----------



## Lemond (19 Sep 2015)

According to the OP: "If you scratch just a little beneath the surface of most average people in this country there's an absolutely vile hatred of cyclists". Like I said before, hysterical nonsense.


----------



## glenn forger (19 Sep 2015)

Lemond said:


> Yet to find a driver that hates me or wants to do me harm.



Here is where you were shown examples of the hatred directed toward cyclists

https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/anyone-know-this-cyclist.180498/page-23

You dismissed them all as "hysterical nonsense" , then you personally abused a blogger who provided more examples, you then disappeared from the thread when the blogger appeared and now here you are a few months later claiming you've never seen the examples in that thread. You're dishonest. You dismiss evidence you disagree with, abuse people you disagree with then lie about what you've read.


----------



## Lemond (19 Sep 2015)

If I remember correctly, your blogger friend was also waffling on about how all drivers are out to get us, or some such nonsense. Your "them vs us" schtick is just so boring.


----------



## jefmcg (21 Sep 2015)

I remember a jokey, pre-internet meme about drivers' wearing hats. It was a good rule of thumb (as another driver) to beware of a driver in a hat. A discussion came up: which was worse, a driver in a hat or an old driver? We decided the worse one was an old driver in a hat. Finally we realised that the driver to be most wary of on the roads was a driver wearing a bowling hat.

This theory stood the test of time. If I noticed a driver wearing a bowling hat, I always assumed they would behave in unpredictable ways. This assumption saved me from a number of prangs, I think.


----------



## Profpointy (21 Sep 2015)

jefmcg said:


> I remember a jokey, pre-internet meme about drivers' wearing hats. It was a good rule of thumb (as another driver) to beware of a driver in a hat. A discussion came up: which was worse, a driver in a hat or an old driver? We decided the worse one was an old driver in a hat. Finally we realised that the driver to be most wary of on the roads was a driver wearing a bowling hat.
> 
> This theory stood the test of time. If I noticed a driver wearing a bowling hat, I always assumed they would behave in unpredictable ways. This assumption saved me from a number of prangs, I think.



There's more than a grain of truth in that. My (elderly) father who was a bit of a dithery driver at the best of times, seemed to get worse when he took to wearing a hat whilst driving. To be fair he's dithery, but steady, so not likely to do anything reckless or foolish so arguably the risk is other people in a hurry trying to get past whilst he makes up his mind where to go.


----------



## jarlrmai (21 Sep 2015)

See also baseball caps


----------



## Sara_H (27 Oct 2015)

Has anyone got any thoughts on the response I've recieved from the park manager in response to my writing to them about this incident?

_Dear Sara_H


I have contacted one of the bowls club members and asked for them to explain the series of events with regards to the incident you referred to in your email of 6th October 2015.


The response indicates as you stated that the car was moving off as you was adjacent the vehicle and was unfortunate the problem occurred, as was the discussion that continued once the car had moved off and parked adjacent the gate to the bowling green.


We do allow cars to access the park at the entrance on Meersbrook Park Road and park at the bowling green for disabled members only, but they have to enter the park with their hazards on and travel 5mph. We have very little complaints with regards to the vehicles entering at this entrance, and as far as I am aware they do not abuse this arrangement which has been in place for many years.


Ian, _


----------



## 13 rider (27 Oct 2015)

Id write back asking if they have reaffirmed to the bowls club members regarding disabled drivers only ,5mph and hazards as your first post made it sound like all club members thought they have right of access . Then I let it drop and move on


----------



## summerdays (27 Oct 2015)

I don't think you are going to get anything further but at least you have clarification on what vehicles are meant to do should you meet a vehicle again there.


----------



## winjim (27 Oct 2015)

Sara_H said:


> Has anyone got any thoughts on the response I've recieved from the park manager in response to my writing to them about this incident?
> 
> _Dear Sara_H
> 
> ...


Have the bowls club received a similar letter reminding them that cycling is allowed in the park?


----------



## Sara_H (27 Oct 2015)

winjim said:


> Have the bowls club received a similar letter reminding them that cycling is allowed in the park?


I don't know. This is the only response I've had. I don't really feel reassured by it.


----------



## winjim (27 Oct 2015)

Sara_H said:


> I don't know. This is the only response I've had. I don't really feel reassured by it.


I can see why the manager doesn't want to get too involved in the altercation, and why he describes it as "unfortunate" but I would maybe just write back thanking him for his response and asking whether the club had received similar. At least then they'd have no cause to say that you're not allowed to be there.


----------



## Sara_H (27 Oct 2015)

winjim said:


> I can see why the manager doesn't want to get too involved in the altercation, and why he describes it as "unfortunate" but I would maybe just write back thanking him for his response and asking whether the club had received similar. At least then they'd have no cause to say that you're not allowed to be there.


Yes, I can see that. I'd hoped he'd expand a little more on risk assessment as I'd mentioned in my original e mail the fact that a public document relating to the park has several mentions about reducing the risk posed by cyclists but no mention at all about reducing the risks by drivers.
The use of hazard lights by drivers in the park isn't going to reduce the risk of collisions, and in fact in this case I'd say it increased the risk as I assumed that her hazards lights meant that she was staying put. It also meant that she didn't use her indicators to indicate that she was pulling away.


----------



## Markymark (27 Oct 2015)

What on earth has putting your hazard lights on got to do with saftey??


----------



## jarlrmai (27 Oct 2015)

Hazard lights are the universal "don't mind me just breaking the law or driving dangerously here" signal


----------



## winjim (27 Oct 2015)

Yes, the hazards lights thing is silly. They're the motorist's equivalent of a hi viz jacket. There's a _perception_ that they somehow make the car more visible.

I recall someone suggesting that there ought to be a "factory reset" for hazard lights, so you can use them maximum three times before you need to go to a service centre and get the system reset. The idea being that you actually _need_ them so rarely that three times would be plenty.


----------



## glenn forger (27 Oct 2015)

To me it sounds like the manager had his ear bent by the old ball fiddlers.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (27 Oct 2015)

This manager said a lot of stuff without actually saying anything!
He clearly does not want to get involved, but to leave the episode unchallenged could lead to a dangerous previous imo.
If the bowlers have convinced themselves that cycling is not allowed in the park, then maybe they are saying it to other cyclists too, that could believe this, avoiding the park as a route.
Maybe, Sara, you could lobby for a few signs that clearly state cycling is allowed, get the local councilor involved, or local cycling activist groups.


----------



## classic33 (28 Oct 2015)

Pat "5mph" said:


> This manager said a lot of stuff without actually saying anything!
> He clearly does not want to get involved, but to leave the episode unchallenged could lead to a dangerous previous imo.
> If the bowlers have convinced themselves that cycling is not allowed in the park, then maybe they are saying it to other cyclists too, that could believe this, avoiding the park as a route.
> Maybe, Sara, you could lobby for a few signs that clearly state cycling is allowed, get the local councilor involved, or local cycling activist groups.


Her local MP's don't want to know about cyclist. Not for another few months yet anyway!


----------



## Markymark (28 Oct 2015)

Presumably then the cars without blue badges are breaking the rules? I'd leave it with a veiled threat that any more anti cyclist nonsense will result in exposing the rule breaking from all the cars that shouldn't be there.


----------



## Joshua Plumtree (28 Oct 2015)

Sounds like an ideal place to start a CC forum ride, preferably when there's a local bowls match in progress.


----------



## Origamist (28 Oct 2015)

Well, you could/should probably let it go...However, you could keep an eye on whether a) the bowls club drivers stick to the 5mph speed restriction (which is a fast walking pace), b) are _bona fide_ disabled drivers, and c) if they always use their hazard warning lights as prescribed. If they are taking the piss, write to the park ranger again with a list of these petty infractions...


----------



## Sara_H (28 Oct 2015)

Origamist said:


> Well, you could/should probably let it go...However, you could keep an eye on whether a) the bowls club drivers stick to the 5mph speed restriction (which is a fast walking pace), b) are _bona fide_ disabled drivers, and c) if they always use their hazard warning lights as prescribed. If they are taking the piss, write to the park ranger again with a list of these petty infractions...


Hmmmm not sure it should be down to individual park users to police the other park users. And I'm not hearing any reassurance in the email I received that they even acknowledge a problem, much less plan to address or monitor the situation.


----------



## Origamist (28 Oct 2015)

Sara_H said:


> Hmmmm not sure it should be down to individual park users to police the other park users. And I'm not hearing any reassurance in the email I received that they even acknowledge a problem, much less plan to address or monitor the situation.



I agree, but if you are not pro-active and don't do anything, the apathetic park ranger will be able to cite very few complaints/issues with the current arrangement. As it stands, the ranger appears to view what happened as a "one off", unfortunate incident. By all means ask him to risk-assess the current arrangements as you believe there is a conflict point, but I'd not expect too much, sadly.


----------



## jefmcg (28 Oct 2015)

@Sara_H was the car in question displaying a blue badge?


----------



## martinclive (28 Oct 2015)

If it's a regular route - just check parked cars there and photograph any without Blue badges

People do not listen to arguments and change their minds that often - to change the narrative, provide data...............


----------



## Sara_H (28 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> @Sara_H was the car in question displaying a blue badge?


I don't know, I didn't check. The driver was certainly very sprightly, though I do appreciate that some blue badge holders may have disabilities that don't appear immediately obvious.


----------



## cd365 (28 Oct 2015)

Sara_H said:


> I don't know, I didn't check. The driver was certainly very sprightly, though I do appreciate that some blue badge holders may have disabilities that don't appear immediately obvious.


Is rudeness a disability?


----------



## Sara_H (28 Oct 2015)

cd365 said:


> Is rudeness a disability?


It could have been if I wasn't so restrained!


----------



## Ganymede (30 Oct 2015)

Sara_H said:


> I don't know, I didn't check. The driver was certainly very sprightly, though I do appreciate that some blue badge holders may have disabilities that don't appear immediately obvious.


She may have had a disabled passenger. Still should be displaying their blue badge.

I have to say, there are things that you can't get a blue badge for which are very frustrating. My Dad had dementia but could walk (although with difficulty, not enough for a badge). However, I couldn't just drop him and go and park, because I couldn't leave him on his own. I had to park as close as I could without being a daffodil, walk him to the destination, then go back and re-park. The blue badge form is all about physical disability, so I couldn't get one for him (though I believe there are provisions in Wales to get one for mental disability). 

Anyway, off-topic, sorry - I agree Sara that you should pursue this to make sure it's not just you being "educated" by this manager bloke.


----------

