Two cyclists injured – Indo comments section

Chuchote

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/two-cyclists-hospitalised-after-separate-dublin-rushhour-collisions-34971388.html

Extraordinary comments on the Independent's report of two cyclists being hospitalised after accidents; the commenters think cyclists shouldn't be on the road, only cars.

Lusk_Doyle

Never read below the article!

eeeee

Don't go there. Ever.

neris

any time i comment on the standard of their articles and "journalists" they always seem to remove the comments. pure gutter trash rag of a paper

Chuchote

Some saner comments this morning. The ones last night were… well, here's some:

Cyclists should not mix with motorised traffic --the have no drivers license--don't understand traffic rules and are a menace to safety and themselves

Someone needs to tell cyclists that there is no room for them in the city centre, and to kindly stop venturing in there

In these two cases you might as well expand that to the suburbs. As this,is where these accidents occurred

tamaskan

Sounds like the Journal.ie...need say no more.

Chuchote

It does… but the fact that these comments are submitted – however knuckle-dragging – means that the idiot radio hosts and sensation-fomenting feature writers who are arousing actual hatred for people on bicycles are having an effect. It's dangerous.

Jawgap

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

Never read below the article the Indo!

FYP

Edit:

I see they are at this rubbish again.......".....his bike collided with a car" (clearly the cyclist's fault then).

Chuchote

Jawgap wrote: »

FYP

Edit:

I see they are at this rubbish again.......".....his bike collided with a car" (clearly the cyclist's fault then).

One cyclist "collided with a car", the other is *believed* to have "collided with a parked car" (not stated if it was in the cycle lane or where it was, or in fact what is the basis of this belief.

Taxuser1

have to say there are a fair few knob ends on bikes though.

my pet hate as a cyclist and motorist is the throwing out of an arm (indicating) and moving out without looking over shoulder to see if there's oncoming traffic (car or bike or peloton)

i see this especially happens when a bus pulls into a stop and a cyclist goes to overtake, throws out the arm and moves right over into oncoming traffic

Lemming

Taxuser1 wrote: »

i see this especially happens when a bus pulls into a stop and a cyclist goes to overtake, throws out the arm and moves right over into oncoming traffic

Whilst I wont argue with you about people who simply do not indicate or indicate and move on a whim, regardless of whatever form of transport they're using, I do have to make a point about your above comment:

How many cars don't bother to indicate when overtaking a bus pulling over? The cyclist moving over is common sense for any road-user located between said bus & yourself and who wishes to overtake said bus. Why do you expect another road user who is in front of you to stop behind a bus just to allow you to overtake? You should be driving/cycling/riding/whatever as the conditions of the road allow. That means taking account of likely behaviour for traffic in and around you.

tomasrojo

Below-the-article comments are mostly graffiti. I'd give them about as much attention. Like graffiti, the pity is there is some quality in there, but it's crowded out by knobs.

tomasrojo

I like the idea (expressed below the line, as recounted above) that Dublin city centre is too crowded for bikes, but a-ok for all those tiny cars.

Taxuser1

Lemming wrote: »

Whilst I wont argue with you about people who simply do not indicate or indicate and move on a whim, regardless of whatever form of transport they're using, I do have to make a point about your above comment:

How many cars don't bother to indicate when overtaking a bus pulling over? The cyclist moving over is common sense for any road-user located between said bus & yourself and who wishes to overtake said bus. Why do you expect another road user who is in front of you to stop behind a bus just to allow you to overtake? You should be driving/cycling/riding/whatever as the conditions of the road allow. That means taking account of likely behaviour for traffic in and around you.

my context was strictly on the dangers to a cyclist by moving off/around without heed of what's coming up behind, regardless of the behaviour or rights of what's behind.

a typical Dublin Bus stop is in the way of a bike's path but not necessarily covers a car's path. While of course the car should take heed of what is ahead, a cyclist moving clearly around an obstacle off its own path and onto another line without looking first is just stupid, regardless of their entitlement to pass first. It was my only point, look first, then indicate.

salomon

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

Never read below the article!

never read the indo.

tomasrojo

You can follow @BestOfTheMail on Twitter to get only the very best of that particular mudhole.

They did this last year, which was amusing and disturbing, and unsuprising:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/10/hitler-quotes-in-the-comments-of-daily-mail-articles_n_7966560.html

Chips Lovell

Don't do it OP. You'd find a better standard of public debate on the jacks wall in Whelans.

Jawgap

Taxuser1 wrote: »

my context was strictly on the dangers to a cyclist by moving off/around without heed of what's coming up behind, regardless of the behaviour or rights of what's behind.

a typical Dublin Bus stop is in the way of a bike's path but not necessarily covers a car's path. While of course the car should take heed of what is ahead, a cyclist moving clearly around an obstacle off its own path and onto another line without looking first is just stupid, regardless of their entitlement to pass first. It was my only point, look first, then indicate.

....that's a motoring view point - if you're on the bike you are better connected to the environment and can hear what's behind and in proximity to you.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating that people cycle with eyes fixed firmly to the front, - they should be on the look out for all kinds of behaviour potentially detrimental to their safety, but the fact is on the bike you can use your ears to much better effect than when you are cocooned in the car.

Chips Lovell

You always, always need to look before changing your line. You can't rely on your ears.

ThisRegard

Taxuser1 wrote: »

have to say there are a fair few knob ends on bikes though.

my pet hate as a cyclist and motorist is the throwing out of an arm (indicating) and moving out without looking over shoulder to see if there's oncoming traffic (car or bike or peloton)

i see this especially happens when a bus pulls into a stop and a cyclist goes to overtake, throws out the arm and moves right over into oncoming traffic

You see a bus pull in with a cyclist behind, you should be automatically giving the cyclist space to go around anyway.

Taxuser1

Jawgap wrote: »

....that's a motoring view point - if you're on the bike you are better connected to the environment and can hear what's behind and in proximity to you.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating that people cycle with eyes fixed firmly to the front, - they should be on the look out for all kinds of behaviour potentially detrimental to their safety, but the fact is on the bike you can use your ears to much better effect than when you are cocooned in the car.

Leigh anois go curamach an text "my pet hate as a cyclist and motorist is the throwing out of an arm (indicating) and moving out without looking over shoulder to see if there's oncoming traffic (car or bike or peloton)"

I cycle quite fast. Someone who does a manoeuvre without looking behind to see what's coming up behind them puts me in danger because I might not be able to react in time but to counteract that I know there are cyclists who will move off so I take this into account. Just like a motorist does. It's frowned upon in track cycling yet the commuter because they've ears are entitled to do this ? That's absolutely ridiculous.

Even the safe cross code starts with Look.

Chips Lovell

ThisRegard wrote: »

You see a bus pull in with a cyclist behind, you should be automatically giving the cyclist space to go around anyway.

Actually, the person in the lane has right of way. It's up to the person moving into to only proceed if the way is clear.

mr spuckler

Jawgap wrote: »

....that's a motoring view point - if you're on the bike you are better connected to the environment and can hear what's behind and in proximity to you.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating that people cycle with eyes fixed firmly to the front, - they should be on the look out for all kinds of behaviour potentially detrimental to their safety, but the fact is on the bike you can use your ears to much better effect than when you are cocooned in the car.

i also see this all the time when on my bike and wouldn't necessarily give the people involved the credit of being very much in touch with what's around them. if i'm moving off my line on the bike i will always look over my shoulder to ensure it's safe to do so and expect other cyclists to do the same.

it is safer in all cases to look first, it also has the added benefit of showing the driver that you are aware of their position on the road and not contributing further to the view that cyclists just do as they please and ignore basic rules / etiquette.

2RockMountain

Chuchote wrote: »

It does… but the fact that these comments are submitted – however knuckle-dragging – means that the idiot radio hosts and sensation-fomenting feature writers who are arousing actual hatred for people on bicycles are having an effect. It's dangerous.

Cause or effect? I'm not sure which is feeding off which?

jon1981

Ignore the tripe in there.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/record-number-of-cyclists-commute-into-dublin-1.2656933

22,000 daily commutes in Dublin city. Do the moaning drivers want all these cyclists converted to motorists...?!


I hope the cyclists recover quickly and get back on the bikes...

Jammyc

tamaskan wrote: »

Sounds like the Journal.ie...need say no more.

For the sake of my own blood pressure, I had to uninstall the Journal.ie app from my phone. Whole thing is full of absolute moronic comments.

Chuchote

Taxuser1 wrote: »

have to say there are a fair few knob ends on bikes though.

Certainly true. Often enough when I and a crowd of other cyclists wait at a red light, someone – always, in my experience, a male between 16 and 30 – races through on a bike with an air of self-entitlement.

The difference is that many drivers don't see the 10 cyclists waiting for the lights to change, but only see the one narcissist, and use him as an example of what knob-ends 'cyclists' are.

And there's an awful lot of driversplaining around.

Jawgap

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

You always, always need to look before changing your line. You can't rely on your ears.

Hence my explanation - I wasn't advocating solely relying on your ears - simply stating a fact.....on the bike, unless you have earphones in, you are much better connected to the environment than when wrapped in the car, even if the radio isn't on and the kids aren't having a 'border dispute' in the back seat

I fully accept the need to keep one's head 'on a swivel' and in fact moving the head as you scan helps you judge sounds and the proximity of the objects that are the source of them better.

Taxuser1 wrote: »

Leigh anois go curamach an text "my pet hate as a cyclist and motorist is the throwing out of an arm (indicating) and moving out without looking over shoulder to see if there's oncoming traffic (car or bike or peloton)"

I cycle quite fast. Someone who does a manoeuvre without looking behind to see what's coming up behind them puts me in danger because I might not be able to react in time but to counteract that I know there are cyclists who will move off so I take this into account. Just like a motorist does. It's frowned upon in track cycling yet the commuter because they've ears are entitled to do this ? That's absolutely ridiculous.

Even the safe cross code starts with Look.

Well, I suppose I'm lucky I'm not a fast cyclist and I just rely on old fashioned anticipation, judgment and common sense - whether in the car or bike I try to think in terms of what might happen and position myself accordingly - if I thought someone was going to pull out to over take a decelerating or stationary bus I'd just hold back and let them do their thing - I like to cycle well within my reaction time.

BTW, I'm all for track cycling norms being incorporated into commuting - especially having a guy ride a motorbike in front of me to pace into work

tomasrojo

Chuchote wrote: »

And there's an awful lot of driversplaining around.

A word you didn't realise you needed until you saw it. Thanks!

Lemming

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Actually, the person in the lane has right of way. It's up to the person moving into to only proceed if the way is clear.

If you're on a road with two lanes I'd agree with you. But in most cases, that is not the case in urban areas; which means that the cyclist is in the same lane as the driver.

terrydel

That 'paper' is a complete rag, nothing more than tabloid clickbait for simpletons.
99% of the 'journalists' are not worthy of the name.
Its just a vehicle for right-wing, neo liberal arseholes. The comments section is just made up of celtic tiger, d4 middle class nob jockies.
And the fact it is nothing more than a mouthpiece for Denis OBrien is enough reason to never even look at it.

Chips Lovell

Lemming wrote: »

If you're on a road with two lanes I'd agree with you. But in most cases, that is not the case in urban areas; which means that the cyclist is in the same lane as the driver.

This is true. Was more thinking of a bus lane, with the cyclist moving out into the general traffic lane to overtake a bus.

What are the points of this thread ? If you don't like the comments don't read them. Don't bring them to attention. Maybe then nobody reads them and it stops being a way for making money for the website.

lennymc

from the ROTR (My emphasis & bolding)

"How to overtake safely
Make sure the road ahead is clear so you have enough distance to overtake and
get back to your own side of the road without forcing any other road user to
move to avoid you.
Never directly follow another overtaking vehicle.
Give way to faster traffic already overtaking from behind.
Before overtaking check that the way is clear, check in your mirror and
check your blind spots to ensure another vehicle is not approaching from
behind. Give your signal in good time, move out when it is safe to do so,
accelerate and overtake with the minimum of delay.
When you are well past, check the mirror, signal and gradually move in
again making sure not to cut across the vehicle you have passed.
Take extra care when overtaking a vehicle displaying a ‘LONG VEHICLE’
sign. This means that the vehicle is at least 13 metres long and you will
need extra road length to pass it and safely return to the left-hand side of
the road.
You must not break the speed limit, even when overtaking."

Reading some posts here would suggest that maybe there is truth to the claims about some cyclists lack an awareness and understanding of ROTR and good roadcraft.

ThisRegard

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Actually, the person in the lane has right of way. It's up to the person moving into to only proceed if the way is clear.

The person on a bike is in the lane, the poster never said anything about pulling out of a cycle path etc. But either way, common sense tells you that the cyclist will want to go around the bus so expect it and give them the courtesy of the space to do so.

edit: I see your acknowledgement above.

lennymc

ThisRegard wrote: »

common sense

assuming any road user has common sense is, imho, a dangerous assumption. Everyone is out to kill you on the road. It's up to you to make sure they don't.

Chuchote

Deleted User wrote: »

What are the points of this thread ? If you don't like the comments don't read them. Don't bring them to attention. Maybe then nobody reads them and it stops being a way for making money for the website.

The point is that ordinary people – perhaps not too bright, but easily influenced by the media – now think it's ok to blame the person who was knocked down, if he happens to have been riding a bicycle. Influential radio hosts and print journalists have been allowed to foment hatred against a specific group of road users. This has to stop.

Blindfolding yourself to hatred doesn't make it less dangerous to you.

ThisRegard

lennymc wrote: »

assuming any road user has common sense is, imho, a dangerous assumption. Everyone is out to kill you on the road. It's up to you to make sure they don't.

I agree, but it's a bit odd a driver complaining about a cyclist moving around a bus, what does the driver think is going to happen, they're going to stop and start all the way to the destination with the bus, or perform a manoeuvre or super Sagan proportions and bunny hop and ride along the top?

Taxuser1

ThisRegard wrote: »

I agree, but it's a bit odd a driver complaining about a cyclist moving around a bus, what does the driver think is going to happen, they're going to stop and start all the way to the destination with the bus, or perform a manoeuvre or super Sagan proportions and bunny hop and ride along the top?

a cyclist first and foremost !!

07Lapierre

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

You always, always need to look before changing your line. You can't rely on your ears.

Agree..Always look (I wear headhones )

Taxuser1

ThisRegard wrote: »

I agree, but it's a bit odd a driver complaining about a cyclist moving around a bus, what does the driver think is going to happen, they're going to stop and start all the way to the destination with the bus, or perform a manoeuvre or super Sagan proportions and bunny hop and ride along the top?

i think you missed the point I was making. It's not that I was complaining about the cyclist's right to move first around the bus. It's that the movement is often done without consideration for their own safety and those around them. Sticking out an arm just isn't enough.

lennymc

throwing this on it's head - i have overtaken cars behind buses when the bus was stopped when on my bicycle. Should I stop mid overtake in case the car pulls out?

Chuchote

The best driver I ever drove with – an RTE cameraman, who told me they were given special training in defensive driving – told me that he had been trained to drive with his eyes switching from the point ahead where complications were due to arise (eg 10m in traffic, 100m on country roads, 200m on motorways) back to what was happening immediately in front of, to the sides of and behind his van.

While I was with him, various drivers did dangerous things – exiting side roads in his path on the Stillorgan Dual Carriageway (as it then was) without signalling or any warning; switching lanes suddenly, etc. He didn't become emotional; he remained utterly calm, and utterly safe, for us and for other road users.

If you're driving and cycling like this, you don't get a horrid fright when a bus stops and the cyclist coming behind it moves out to pass. You'll have calculated as you watched the bus and the cyclist that this is going to be the outcome when the bus pulls in to the upcoming stop.

I'd prefer cyclists to signal more, myself, but people also have a responsibility to be aware of another road user's likely behaviour.

PaulieC

terrydel wrote: »

And the fact it is nothing more than a mouthpiece for Denis OBrien is enough reason to never even look at it.

Yet you looked long enough to form this very rounded opinion of its commenters:

terrydel wrote: »

The comments section is just made up of celtic tiger, d4 middle class nob jockies.

terrydel

PaulieC wrote: »

Yet you looked long enough to form this very rounded opinion of its commenters:

I have yeah, then learned the error of my ways and stopped.

mr spuckler

Chuchote wrote: »

I'd prefer cyclists to signal more, myself, but people also have a responsibility to be aware of another road user's likely behaviour.

fully agree once we include cyclists in that

if every road user is aware of and considerate towards the likely actions of other road users then we won't have any problems!

lennymc

Chuchote wrote: »

The best driver I ever drove with – an RTE cameraman, who told me they were given special training in defensive driving – told me that he had been trained to drive with his eyes switching from the point ahead where complications were due to arise (eg 10m in traffic, 100m on country roads, 200m on motorways) back to what was happening immediately in front of, to the sides of and behind his van.

While I was with him, various drivers did dangerous things – exiting side roads in his path on the Stillorgan Dual Carriageway (as it then was) without signalling or any warning; switching lanes suddenly, etc. He didn't become emotional; he remained utterly calm, and utterly safe, for us and for other road users.

If you're driving and cycling like this, you don't get a horrid fright when a bus stops and the cyclist coming behind it moves out to pass. You'll have calculated as you watched the bus and the cyclist that this is going to be the outcome when the bus pulls in to the upcoming stop.

I'd prefer cyclists to signal more, myself, but people also have a responsibility to be aware of another road user's likely behaviour.

That's all very well and good for an advanced driver, but, not everyone on the road has done advanced training, and as such, every road user must cater for the lowest common denominator.

It's also a good example of where this guy was making sure that other road users didn't kill him. He used his anticipation to avoid incidents that technically would not have been his fault (cars pulling into his lane etc) but would have been a less desirable outcome. Scanning (fore, middle and distance) is a great technique for giving an overall picture of what is going on ahead of you, but you also need to know (imho) as a road user, what is going on to your left, your right and behind you.

I have done a number of motorcycle advanced training courses andwas always told to keep the bike in gear, ready to go at lights and always keep an eye on your mirror. One day, on the Howth road at supervalue, I was stopped at a pedestrian light. I was watching my mirror and noticed that a car wasn't going to stop. I was able to accelerate away and avoid being rear ended because I was aware of what was going on behind me. A lot of cyclists simply aren't aware of what is going on.

tigerboon

Chuchote wrote: »

he had been trained to drive with his eyes switching from the point ahead where complications were due to arise (eg 10m in traffic,

Depends on what you mean by "in traffic" but assuming 50kph, that's a speed of 14m/second. Anyone know off hand how quick the human brain reacts to a situation? Even when stopped that's only to the front of the car in front of you

Jawgap

Chuchote wrote: »

The best driver I ever drove with – an RTE cameraman, who told me they were given special training in defensive driving – told me that he had been trained to drive with his eyes switching from the point ahead where complications were due to arise (eg 10m in traffic, 100m on country roads, 200m on motorways) back to what was happening immediately in front of, to the sides of and behind his van.

While I was with him, various drivers did dangerous things – exiting side roads in his path on the Stillorgan Dual Carriageway (as it then was) without signalling or any warning; switching lanes suddenly, etc. He didn't become emotional; he remained utterly calm, and utterly safe, for us and for other road users.

If you're driving and cycling like this, you don't get a horrid fright when a bus stops and the cyclist coming behind it moves out to pass. You'll have calculated as you watched the bus and the cyclist that this is going to be the outcome when the bus pulls in to the upcoming stop.

I'd prefer cyclists to signal more, myself, but people also have a responsibility to be aware of another road user's likely behaviour.

I did the IAM course when I worked in the UK - doing it and passing it was a requirement for the crowd I worked for - probably one of the best and most useful courses I've ever done - it really made me 'appreciate' Irish driving standards when I came home

2RockMountain

Chuchote wrote: »

The point is that ordinary people – perhaps not too bright, but easily influenced by the media – now think it's ok to blame the person who was knocked down, if he happens to have been riding a bicycle. Influential radio hosts and print journalists have been allowed to foment hatred against a specific group of road users. This has to stop.

Very true, if this kind of hatred was directed against a religious group or an ethnic group or a sexual orientation group, it would be illegal. But it's still socially acceptable to hate cyclists, because they use a different mode of transport to others.

Chuchote

2RockMountain wrote: »

Very true, if this kind of hatred was directed against a religious group or an ethnic group or a sexual orientation group, it would be illegal. But it's still socially acceptable to hate cyclists, because they use a different mode of transport to others.

It's acceptable because it's fomented by radio and print journalists.

It's one of the reasons I'm so pushed about getting protected cycle lanes to every school: if people's kids were cycling they'd be less hasty to target cyclists.