Jeremy Vine.

[Gwylan]

Apparently, the above radio personality is being villified for reporting an HGV driver for a close pass that he filmed on his helmet cam recently. there's even a petition demanding that he to be sacked from the BBC because of this.
Now, on the basis that he submitted said footage to the authorities, it's up to them to take what action they feel suitable; in this case the driver has been suspended, or not, depending on which information you believe.
This does pose the interesting question that, if it had been the likes of you or me who had submitted the footage, it would have hardly raised a ripple. But because of who it was, there's uproar.
Hmm.

Think the post that observes that if any of us made such a report we would likely be ignored. Or dismissed as another BOF.

Putting aside my views on Mr Vine there are broader issues.

Based on a reasonable amount of cycling experience elsewhere in the world some points emerge.
Generally painting a line on a road does not protect a cyclist from nearby traffic. That is mostly political box ticking and that's it.
It does not make the road wider and makes life difficult for the poor lads and lassies who are expected to drive trucks down roads that are several feet or more too narrow for a safe passage

Physically separating vehicles and cyclists is the way to go. That is what we see across our European neighbours. But they have been doing this for a long time.

Generally the UK is not a nation where there are that many cyclists.
In places like Belgium and the Netherlands cycling is built into society and most drivers are or have been cyclists.

We might also spare a thought for the dangerous state of that margin of the road that cyclists are expected to occupy.
Whilst I'm on the rant will someone make it illegal to have the slits in drains lined in the direction of travel?

I'm going for a lay down now and Nurssie will bring my 6 o'clock medicine. She's late, just cannot get the help......

 

[boydj]

I think the key point to be made in regard to the OP is that it was not JV that reported the driver or asked for him to be reported, it was one of the cops who thought the lorry driver should have moved over or, better still, waited until he could give a safe passing distance.

We could be critical of the police cyclist position, but how often do we hear that it doesn't matter where the cyclist is, the driver must pass at a safe distance?

 

[bonzobanana]

I feel the HGV driver has done nothing wrong and was perfectly positioned in his lane. Like others I feel the police cyclist was very poorly positioned making it awkward for passing vehicles in the next lane. I feel the cyclist was not considering other road users. If I come out to pass stationary vehicles I normally go back in I guess to the middle or one third out from the pavement maybe to control the lane but not right up close to the next lane. I like to come down on cyclists side where possible but I really don't feel this is fair to the HGV driver. I don't believe Jeremy Vine should be sacked though regarding this and certainly don't believe the HGV driver should be punished either. Dare I say it but I think the police cyclist might need some additional road training.

 

[mjr]

You could argue that the Police Officer was in breach of rule 66 of the Highway Code.

• Rule 66: Be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in groups. You can ride two abreast and it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders. Be aware of drivers behind you, and allow them to overtake (e.g. by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so.

And so, applying that rule, is the approach to a junction usually considered a safe place to overtake?

Really disappointed by the comments on here blaming the cyclist and excusing the trucker. Full on Stockholm Syndrome CC members, eh?

 

[mjr]

Whilst I'm on the rant will someone make it illegal to have the slits in drains lined in the direction of travel?

While not illegal, Norfolk and Cambs councils both replace them with grid covers if you report them. Of course, it would be nicer if the roadworkers spotted them, but it's a start.

 

[Time Waster]

The HGV driver is positioned correctly in the lane but that does not let him off the safe passing distance. Not in my interpretation of the relevant rules. If that's wrong please show me even an advisory HC rule that says driving in no marked lane excuses the requirement to give cyclists a safe passing distance.

All road users should not make a manoeuvre if it is not safe to do so or it breaks the rules in doing so. Road position really can't override the rules.

I really dislike cyclists defending the indefensible whether that's a cyclists or driver. Usually people on a cycling forum will argue night is day to defend a cyclist who did wrong. So it's unusual to get them ignoring things to defend a motorist who's in the wrong. It's a change but not a refreshing change just a saddening one IMHO.

BTW do you think the unconfirmed claim the driver is suspended and might lose his job is affecting people's views? If he was just a private motorist driving a car without serious consequences do you think people on here would defend him so strongly?

 

[PK99]

.

Really disappointed by the comments on here blaming the cyclist and excusing the trucker. Full on Stockholm Syndrome CC members, eh?

As I am repeatedly disappointed on here by posts excusing any and all behaviours by cyclists when issues arise, rather than addressing the issue of good cycling practice.

Personally as a cyclist, I would never ride that close to a lane divider. If, for instance, I were passing stationary or slow moving traffic I would take primary in the adjacent lane to control traffic coming from behind. If the police cyclist felt there was not enough space for a safe pass, that is what he should have done. Especially as he was there in a protective role.

The truck driver did nothing wrong.

 

[PaulSB]

The group of cyclists is badly positioned and riding two up in this situation is poor practice whether it's allowed by the Highway Code or not.

The inside riders are too close to the kerb and the outside riders too close to the traffic. Their positioning means any protection the cycle lane offers is negated. To my mind the purpose of a city cycle lane is to provide a space for riders to use with some safety not to provide a lane in which people ride two up and chat.

Poor cycling and the police officer should have advised the riders on safe road positioning. I guess this is central London, two up in a cycle lane is dangerous and lacks consideration for other road users.

The lorry driver? Yes, it's a close pass, staying in your lane isn't an excuse for failing to give another road user the correct amount of space.

No medals for anyone involved.

 

[PK99]

The group of cyclists is badly positioned and riding two up in this situation is poor practice whether it's allowed by the Highway Code or not.

Two up, lined up : primary and secondary, would have been fine.

Look at the actual positioning of following pairs. They were offset and effectively 4 abreast.

When I am back marking rides, and see the group ahead doing that, I advise riders accordingly. If in the group I model correct positioning.

The Plod involved was a poor cyclist.

 

[newfhouse]

Not the greatest positioning from the cyclists, and reasonable for the driver to be annoyed about having to wait to pass them safely, but frustration isn’t sufficient reason to put them in danger with an undeniably close pass.

 

[Time Waster]

The cyclists did things wrong so the rules don't apply to me the driver is a defence I hope the hgv driver uses and that gets reported as much as this JV petition. 😉

 

[iandg]

And so, applying that rule, is the approach to a junction usually considered a safe place to overtake?

Really disappointed by the comments on here blaming the cyclist and excusing the trucker. Full on Stockholm Syndrome CC members, eh?

An urban situation with slow moving traffic in segregated lanes. Yes, I would consider it a safe place to overtake.

I'm not excusing the trucker but cyclists need to abide by rules as well. There is plenty of room to allow safe overtaking and the cyclist should have positioned himself in the primary position (i.e. centre of lane/closer to the kerb) to allow this to happen.

Edit: If you were involved in a dangerous close pass would you throw your hand up in protest (in this case before the vehicle has passed) or keep both hands on the bars and focus on staying safe/moving to a safer position?

Personally, my priority would be to make my self safe and only remonstrate if was looking for confrontation and only then if it was safe to do so.

 

[CXRAndy]

In that instance the Waitrose drive was driving in the outside lane and not veering into the lane where the police officer was a little too close to the centre line. Driver did nothing wrong in this instance.

Unlike the Porsche Cayenne driver yesterday who deliberately drove across the centre line coming towards me whilst I was riding two abreast with my wife on a country lane-Ar*ehole driver

 

[iandg]

And yet the rider in blue in front of the police rider had zero problems with it, despite riding two abreast himself. The ground speed was low and the speed differential was probably only a few mph, if that had been me I would have just moved a little to the left, although I wouldn't have been in that position in the first place.

Which is exactly what cyclist behind did.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Look a few frames before and it shows straight on as well as left. Seems to be crap markings all around.

I saw that but from that marking though they are still in a compulsory left there is no other option available to them. Now you could be right & it's bad markings, but as somebody who has no idea where this is I would have moved into the lane to the right on seeing the left arrow.