Beware of clipless pedals

penexpers

CYCLING SHOES that clip to the pedals were a factor in a collision in which a cyclist was fatally injured when his racing bike was struck by a car driven by his son, an inquest has heard.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0216/1224289928260.html

wallplugsocket

Tbh and with all due respect, I'd be more concerned with the gentleman not wearing a helmet

trad

What about Cycling Ireland branding Sean Kelly a dinosaur?

Beasty

TiernanJ wrote: »

Tbh and with all due respect, I'd be more concerned with the gentleman not wearing a helmet

No reference is made in the report to the fact he was not wearing a helmet being a contributory factor

Unless there is some such evidence in the public domain, that aspect is off-topic for this discussion

Thanks

Beasty

Beasty

“I would believe he wasn’t able to get them [his feet] out quick enough. I believe it was a contributory factor,” added Sgt Prendergast.

I wonder if Sgt Prendergast claims to be a specialist in this area - if not, I am not sure much weight can be given to his "belief"

eoghan84

It says the following just over half way down the text
"Mr Thackaberry was not wearing a cycling helmet."

Beasty

eoghan84 wrote: »

It says the following just over half way down the text
"Mr Thackaberry was not wearing a cycling helmet."

I know that - it does not say that was a "contributory factor" - it simply states it as a fact (as it states that he was aged 70, but hopefully no-one is suggesting that 70 year olds should be banned from cycling), whereas Sgt Prendergast "believes" that wearing clipless pedals was

We have had plenty of helmet "debates", and I see no point in turning this into another one

billy.fish

Yeah cause 1 second would have alloed him to clip out and then stop....

They “had less than a one second view of each other. They hadn’t sufficient time to brake and avoid the collision,” said Sgt Prendergast.

Also didn't know we had any professional 70 year old cyclists....

macadam

He did'nt stop at the junction and was not wearing a Helmet, his head hit the windscreen, the helmet should have been a bigger factor rather than the shoes, still a tragedy

Beasty

macadam wrote: »

He did'nt stop at the junction and was not wearing a Helmet, his head hit the windscreen, the helmet should have been a bigger factor rather than the shoes, still a tragedy

The report does not mention head injuries - unless you can point to some other public evidence that the lack of helmet was a contibutory factor, helmets are off-topic - Final Warning

seamus

Beasty wrote: »

I wonder is Sgt Prendergast claims to be a specialist in this area - if not, I am not sure much weight can be given to his "belief"

+1
Sgt. Prendergast with all due respect is clearly talking out of his arse and hasn't a clue.
He states:

“These professional cyclists seem to put their heads down and just go for it. I believe he wasn’t aware of the junction and was cycling straight on,” he said.

Whereas an actual witness said:

[He] could not stop in time because he was a bit “wobbly” on the bike.

Which is clearly at odds with the Sergeant's assertion that he put his head down and went for it.

I remember seeing this in the news at the time, horrible experience for all involved. More than likely he had taken that junction hundreds of times before without incident, but this time failed to hear the oncoming car. A stark reminder to obey traffic signs, regardless of how often you've used that road and how experienced you are.

C3PO

My sincere commiserations to all involved, a terrible tragedy!
Having read the report I can't see how the additional second or two required to remove his shoes from his pedals could have made any difference to the tragic result! Is the Garda suggesting that the cyclist could have thrown himself off the bike or used his feet for brakes? A statement like that really should be backed up!

smacl

Sgt Prendergast agreed with the coroner that the cyclist should have stopped at the junction at which there was a stop sign.

The presence of a hedgerow also restricted the view of the cyclist to his right and the view of the driver, the inquest was told.

Ignoring a stop sign to go through a junction at speed with restricted visibility is reckless, breaking the rules of the road, and always going to put you at serious risk. Can't see how being clipped in or wearing safety gear of any description is a significant part of this.

Beasty

tbh, for an experienced cyclist it's not even a second or two to unclip - it comes naturally and imo is not materially slower than removing your foot from standard pedals

Jawgap

Terrible accident for all concerned.

I can't see how the pedals contributed. If the poor chap had unclipped, he still had to stop or take avoiding action to prevent a collision - that seems to be the substantial cause.

On a slightly more positive note, it's somewhat encouraging to see that I've potentially a few more decades of cycling in me!

enas

What I read here, is the following:

Gardai Sergeant Donal Prendergast, who attended the accident, noted that Mr Thackaberry was not wearing a helmet and also said the fact that he was wearing cycling shoes with clipless pedals may have contributed to the accident, saying, “I would believe he wasn’t able to get them [his feet] out quick enough. I believe it was a contributory factor.”

Sure, he doesn't say not wearing a helmet was a contributory factor, but he "noted" he wasn't wearing one. What does that mean then? He could have noted as well that we was wearing a dark blue jersey, or a long sleeve jersey, or read and purple shoes, or anything else. But no, he only noted he wasn't wearing a helmet. Sure there is at least an insinuation. But what strikes me as complete ignorance is this pathetic explicit mention to clipless pedals as being a contributory factor.

And his ignorance doesn't need further to be demonstrated when he comes out with:

“These professional cyclists seem to put their heads down and just go for it. I believe he wasn’t aware of the junction and was cycling straight on.”

ednwireland

TBH, terrible accident, but i think this might have had more to do with it

Sgt Prendergast agreed with the coroner that the cyclist should have stopped at the junction at which there was a stop sign.

rules of the road people

enas

ednwireland wrote: »

TBH, terrible accident, but i think this might have had more to do with it

rules of the road people

That's the only issue to be sure, why bother with the cyclist-bashing bull**** then? Just makes me sick, and I believe doesn't help much the family in this terrible tragedy.

the_syco

“As I approached the crossroads I could see him cycle to the left . . . I started to brake then and he swerved out to the right. It happened so fast,” he said.

It was either the cyclists fault, or the drivers fault. Nothing to do with clipless pedals.

nerraw1111

I'm astonished that the Garda would make a petty and crude remark about 'professional cyclists' at an inquest into the death of a member of the public.

A verdict of accidental death was recorded yet Prendergast makes all sort of baseless assumptions none of which were actually to do with the death. The coroner said it was a 'tragic and freak accident.'

But Prendergast makes a tacky remark about cyclists putting 'their heads down and just go for it.' Which may be his own view but has nothing to do with this request.

I'm also concerned that a senior member of the Garda has no idea what the word 'professional' means. The coroner, who is a professional, said it was a freak accident.

Jawgap

To be honest we do not know what the Guard said exactly; nor do we know the context for his remarks, the questions both before and after and the general tone - so I think its unfair to castigate him on the basis of a sole reporter's account of the proceedings, which itself will have (probably) been edited for tone and content before it was published.

victorcarrera

I think the point being made about the clipless pedals is that it was the rear wheel of the bike that was hit and the cyclist may have been pulled back on to the windscreen of the car rather than falling or been thrown off as would have been the case with traditional pedals.
For those of you who are not familiar with clipless pedals. The feet can only be released by twisting it to a particular angle otherwise the rider is locked to the bike.
The blind bend and high hedgerows are something we are going to have to live with though because of the the way they have been cultivated as land barriers and of course now the state grant aids land owners to maintain them.

carthoris

victorcarrera wrote: »

I think the point being made about the clipless pedals is that it was the rear wheel of the bike that was hit and the cyclist may have been pulled back on to the windscreen of the car rather than falling or been thrown off as would have been the case with traditional pedals.

It would seem to me (based on a newspaper report of garda comments as to witness' interpretation of what they saw - i.e 4th or 5th hand information) that the clipless pedals would not have changed the way the cyclist fell. My reading of the article was that the bicycle was at 90 degrees to the car (they met at a crossroads) so the car hit the cyclist side on.

The force of the collision of the car would knock the wheels out from under the cyclist leaving them nowhere to go but onto the bonnet of the car.

If this was a pedestrian standing in the road and they were hit by a car then their head would again strike the bonnet or windscreen - this is a standard collision pattern.

The only reason I could see the clipless pedals being an issue was if the bike was not roadworthy and the brakes failed and the gentleman was not used to the pedals and could not get his feet out to stop himself.

Nonetheless - it is a terrible thing to happen to the family.

spyderski

victorcarrera wrote: »

The blind bend and high hedgerows are something we are going to have to live with though because of the the way they have been cultivated as land barriers and of course now the state grant aids land owners to maintain them.

Oh yes, those "land barriers" are such an inconvenience, it would be much better to have cattle & sheep walking around the roads at will....

Canis Lupus

Jeez we'd argue over anything.

Poor fella RIP. Stay safe everyone.

victorcarrera

spyderski wrote: »

Oh yes, those "land barriers" are such an inconvenience, it would be much better to have cattle & sheep walking around the roads at will....

Think fence as in the way they do it in france, switzerland etc, where they build them about 2 Meters back from the edge of the road giving total visibility.
Not all land is used for animals. Arable land for example does not need to be protected by high walls, hedges or trees.

Lumen

Canis Lupus wrote: »

Jeez we'd argue over anything.

No we wouldn't.

victorcarrera

carthoris wrote: »

It would seem to me (based on a newspaper report of garda comments as to witness' interpretation of what they saw - i.e 4th or 5th hand information) that the clipless pedals would not have changed the way the cyclist fell. My reading of the article was that the bicycle was at 90 degrees to the car (they met at a crossroads) so the car hit the cyclist side on.

The force of the collision of the car would knock the wheels out from under the cyclist leaving them nowhere to go but onto the bonnet of the car.

Read it again then.
It was a 1st hand description from eye witness.
1st Impact was to rear wheel of bicycle not side hit on cyclist.
Had he not been clipped in he might have got away with just a glancing blow.

Irish Times wrote:

Daughter of the deceased man, Rose Thackaberry who was a passenger in the car..."I could just see the car hit the back wheel of his bike and then I saw his face on the windscreen,” said Ms Thackaberry.

carthoris

victorcarrera wrote: »

Read it again then.
It was a 1st hand description from eye witness.

The intention was to show that the article was written by a journalist who reported what a Garda said who based his suggestion that the clipless pedals were contributory on what he was told by the witness so there is bound to be a lot of context and information lost between everything. As Jawgap said:

To be honest we do not know what the Guard said exactly; nor do we know the context for his remarks, the questions both before and after and the general tone - so I think its unfair to castigate him on the basis of a sole reporter's account of the proceedings, which itself will have (probably) been edited for tone and content before it was published.

victorcarrera wrote: »

1st Impact was to rear wheel of bicycle not side hit on cyclist.
Had he not been clipped in he might have got away with just a glancing blow.

My apologies for not being clear - the intention was to clarify that the cyclist was travelling in a direction perpendicular to the direction of the car and that rear wheel was hit side on rather than the car and cyclist travelling in the same direction and the cyclist being hit from behind. I was not suggesting that the car hit the cyclist fully side on.

All that cleared up - it seems clear to me that the force of the initial collision would have caused to cyclist to hit the bonnet whether there were clipless pedals being used or not.

BostonB

I don't get what the clip less pedals have to do with it.

thebouldwhacker

Nothing, they guy didn't stop at a crossroads in time, he got hit by the car and died. I dont see why this case is any different from any other cycling fatality.
Should we not let him rip and not add to his family's grief by posting up about pedals, helmets, age or what ever.
Its a sad story and the lesson to be learned is that what we do can be fatal if we aren't careful out there.

I feel so sorry for his family, a terribly sad story, rip.

victorcarrera

BostonB wrote: »

I don't get what the clip less pedals have to do with it.

Well if you don't want to read the thread the synopsis is a discussion on the safety benefits of making clipless pedals compulsory on the brake pedals of all mechanically propelled vehicles.

BostonB

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

Nothing, they guy didn't stop at a crossroads in time, he got hit by the car and died. I dont see why this case is any different from any other cycling fatality.
Should we not let him rip and not add to his family's grief by posting up about pedals, helmets, age or what ever.
Its a sad story and the lesson to be learned is that what we do can be fatal if we aren't careful out there.

I feel so sorry for his family, a terribly sad story, rip.

Indeed. But its being miss reported.

p15574

victorcarrera wrote: »

I think the point being made about the clipless pedals is that it was the rear wheel of the bike that was hit and the cyclist may have been pulled back on to the windscreen of the car rather than falling or been thrown off as would have been the case with traditional pedals.

That sounds plausible to me. If you end up on the bonnet, the resistance/bulk of a person being attached to a bike, or the bike getting caught on the front grill, might result on you being swung around to strike the windscreen, instead of a rolling, glancing blow to you and your body continuing over the car or off the side of the bonnet. That's not to discount a head impact against the ground or something equally catastrophic though.

seamus

There are too many variables here to make the conclusion though that the clipless pedals were "a factor".

Theoretically if the rear wheel was struck then theoretically there would be vertical and lateral rotational forces applied to the bike & rider's lower half away from the vehicle (rotating about the front wheel) while the opposite rotational forces brought the rider's upper half down towards the the vehicle. Theoretically then you could say that by virtue of being clipped onto the bike, more of this rotational force was applied to the rider than would otherwise have been, so theoretically the rider's upper body fell more quickly than would have if he did not have clipless pedal or toeclips on. Theoretically.

In reality the forces applied are virtually identical, with or without cleats. The rider by virtue of being attached to the bike will go with the bike when it's struck. FWIW both times I've been glanced by a car and the time I slipped on ice, I found myself unclipped from the bike by the forces involved. But that's multi-directional SPDs for ya.

dario28

I got hit by a car in a similar situation before X-mas , T junction and I went airborne over the bonnet , there was that split second before the impact ,clipping out was last thing on my mind, but on impact and somewhere between me taking off and landing the bike separated from my bike shoes....

Stupid scaremongering statement by the Cop....

biomed32

i agree with seamus here in that there are too many variables here to make a proper conclusion, but although mentioned by the garda and the ruling that the clipless pedals were a factor in the poor man's death,i dont believe they were, i can guarantee you by experience as soon as you hit the deck your feet automatically fall out of the pedals. I dont know why the gentleman was wobbling, for me i tend to wobble getting back into the pedals after stopping but appearantly he was heading right on.

carthoris

biomed32 wrote: »

the ruling that the clipless pedals were a factor in the poor man's death

Thankfully that was not mentioned in the ruling - at least from the reports. It was only the comment from Sergeant Prendergast.

Timmaay

I actually know that junction well that this happened at, and to be honest I myself have very nearly missed the stop sign and had more then one dodgy moment on it! Hopefully as a result of this better signpost will be put up. RIP to the lad, it really is awful to the son and the whole family.