nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

What's the obsession middle aged lads have with cycling?

shakeitoff

Every weekend, they swarm around, what is it about cycling that brings them in? Why aren't they playing weekend footie or mountain biking?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Boom_Bap

magicbastarder wrote: »

most of the cyclists are probably motorists too. less likely for the converse to be true.

we all have stuff to learn on the roads

P_1

Ellie Hallowed Acorn wrote: »

Yeah, and this prick happened to be a cyclist, whose driving behaviour in that instance was directly related to his being a cyclist.

It was more the irony of the fact of the amount of complaints you hear from cyclists (quite rightly a lot of the time) about motorist behaviour and responsibility, and then this guy, very into cycling, driving like a fcuking maniac to be in time for his cycle.

Tbf he sounds like he's an asshole on the bike too

Chips Lovell

Boom_Bap wrote: »

I'd like to see at least one cyclist and one motorist learn something new from each of these threads and admit it

Never going to happen. If there's one thing angry people hate more than the target of their anger, it's admitting that they're wrong.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

P_1 wrote: »

Tbf he sounds like he's an asshole on the bike too

Did not respond well to driving feedback either I can tell you :pac:

[Deleted User]

Blazer wrote: »

I just came up the N20 there and met about 10 cyclists in a group.
Every one of them was single file, a max of 3 per group and spaced out between each group. And cycling in the hard shoulder.
You know what was the one thing in common with them?
They were foreign so didn’t have the Irish chip on their shoulder about how they have as much right to be on the road as other users.
I’m pretty sure what they were thinking was “I’m sure as hell going to be careful on there roads with these lunatics and give them plenty of space to pass me out”

Just curious as to how you managed to get their nationality while overtaking?

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Blazer

Patww79 wrote: »

Yeah just fill the thread with pics of that one in the purple posted earlier. Job done.

How many people googled her?

Arrgghh

Blazer

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Just curious as to how you managed to get their nationality while overtaking?

They were all slim and good looking

07Lapierre

Ellie Hallowed Acorn wrote: »

and then this guy, very into cycling, driving like a fcuking maniac to be in time for his cycle.

I should hope so! Nothing worse than agreeing to meet up with mates for a spin and one muppet is late! The rest of us standing around wearing Lycra!

partyguinness

To Motorists:

There is a reason why cyclists cycle in the middle of a road lane. For the uninitiated, cyclists are encouraged not to hug the footpath/kerb and stay out on the road.

It's called 'dominating the road'. Why? Because if you hug the footpath/kerb then you will leave more space and motorists are less likely to slow down and to take more risks when passing you. Plus by hugging the kerb you risk whacking off it out on to the road. Also you may not be seen by a motorist. Quite frankly it is dangerous to stick too close to the side of the road.

By 'dominating the road' the motorist has to notice you and slow down and take appropriate over taking measures while cursing and swearing little realizing that it's for the benefit of the motorist also.

Road safety awareness courses in the UK actually teach this stuff- I know as I was on one...:o

I hope someone is learning this for the first time and I have done my bit.

Blazer

partyguinness wrote: »

To Motorists:

There is a reason why cyclists cycle in the middle of a road lane. For the uninitiated, cyclists are encouraged not to hug the footpath/kerb and stay out on the road.

It's called 'dominating the road'. Why? Because if you hug the footpath/kerb then you will leave more space and motorists are less likely to slow down and to take more risks when passing you. Plus by hugging the kerb you risk whacking off it out on to the road. Also you may not be seen by a motorist. Quite frankly it is dangerous to stick too close to the side of the road.

By 'dominating the road' the motorist has to notice you and slow down and take appropriate over taking measures while cursing and swearing little realizing that it's for the benefit of the motorist also.

Road safety awareness courses in the UK actually teach this stuff- I know as I was on one...:o

I hope someone is learning this for the first time and I have done my bit.

To cyclists .. **** off and stay at the side of the road, ride one abreast and in small groups and we’ll all be good.

[Deleted User]

ewc78 wrote: »

I read this first as 'their masterbation attracts bears'

That's a different type of bear you're thinking of.

Blazer wrote: »

They were all slim and good looking

Hah, very funny. Now, seriously, how did you identify their nationality while overtaking?

Blazer wrote: »

To cyclists .. **** off and stay at the side of the road, ride one abreast and in small groups and we’ll all be good.

Why would you think that your journey is more important than anyone else's?

P_1

Blazer wrote: »

To cyclists .. **** off and stay at the side of the road, ride one abreast and in small groups and we’ll all be good.

To twats. Stop being bloody twats

Blazer

P_1 wrote: »

To twats. Stop being bloody twats

It was a tongue in cheek response to the poster who posted the bike nonsense.
Strangely for the cyclists who mention the Netherlands a few lines they are pretty strictly with cyclists also.
Perhaps cyclists could learn a thing or two from their rules also?
And also the driver is presumed in the wrong ...not assumed.

https://www.holland.com/global/tourism/information/cycling-rules-in-holland.htm

magicbastarder

partyguinness wrote: »

Road safety awareness courses in the UK actually teach this stuff- I know as I was on one...:o

https://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/sharing-the-road-together-drivers-cyclists/road-positioning/

Cyclists are trained to ride away from the gutter where there may be debris and grid covers.

In normal conditions, a cyclist will ride in what is known as the ‘secondary position’, approximately 1/3 into the carriageway.

However, sometimes they will need to ride further out in what is called the ‘primary position’, to improve visibility or to deter drivers from squeezing past where the road narrows, for example at a pedestrian island. Whilst riding in the primary position a cyclist will be in the middle of the road between the kerb and centre line.

Tip When you see a cyclist move out, remember they are trained to do this to protect themselves and are not doing it to deliberately hold you up. They will move back into the secondary position when it is safe.

Tip be patient and hold back for a few moments.

Plasid

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

And for the most part I won't argue with the majority of that.

However, I've never been injured by a car but I have by a cyclist. Twice.

The second time I needed treatment that cost me - I was left injured and out of pocket through someone else's law breaking, but how do I identify them ?

All things being equal - yes, a car is more dangerous than a bike when breaking the law. The difference being that if injured by a car you can identify the driver usually, and there will be consequences. Not with the idiot who caused my fall. Away scot free to do it again and be defended by people.

Same way you identify an uninsured, untaxed, unregistered, etc driver who leaves the scene.. its wrong but its not all cyclists or motorists

Grab All Association

Fair play to them keeping active. What I'd be more worried about is the increasing number of people over 30 wearing Hollister. Ffs most teens stop wearing it reaching 20.

magicbastarder

Blazer wrote: »

Strangely for the cyclists who mention the Netherlands a few lines they are pretty strictly with cyclists also.

you're going to be hard pushed to find a cyclist who would self-identify as one, who would disagree that we need more enforcement all round.
i see two cyclists on my commute whom i avoid. one in particular because i don't want to be there when he's plastered across the front of a car or a lorry, which i would guess is a 50% chance within any one year.

The Kop

magicbastarder wrote: »

you're going to be hard pushed to find a cyclist who would self-identify as one, who would disagree that we need more enforcement all round.
i see two cyclists on my commute whom i avoid. one in particular because i don't want to be there when he's plastered across the front of a car or a lorry, which i would guess is a 50% chance within any one year.

And if that happens will it be his own fault or the driver of which ever vehicle that he collided with?
According to AndrewJRenko it's always the motorists fault, but you are telling us this guy is putting himself in danger by the way he rides a bike.

meeeeh

magicbastarder wrote: »

https://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/sharing-the-road-together-drivers-cyclists/road-positioning/

So basically in majority of cases you should be on the outside of the road and not middle of the road.

magicbastarder

AndrewJRenko is his own man and can speak for himself.

i have left details with a motorist before when she was in a collision with a cyclist. the cyclist wasn't best pleased, he assumed i'd side with a fellow cyclist.

Plasid

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Fair point and chances are - no.

There was actually (miracle of miracles) a Guard in the vicinity when I was injured.

Didn't even help me up!!!! Other pedestrians did that and a dismounted cyclist offered me a hanky! Bless him!!!

This, the entire debate is unnecessary if the god damn Gardai would just do their bloody job

tobdom

Ellie Hallowed Acorn wrote: »

Yeah, and this prick happened to be a cyclist, whose driving behaviour in that instance was directly related to his being a cyclist.

It was more the irony of the fact of the amount of complaints you hear from cyclists (quite rightly a lot of the time) about motorist behaviour and responsibility, and then this guy, very into cycling, driving like a fcuking maniac to be in time for his cycle.

See for me this is the thing, when certain people are complaining about 'cyclists', that instantly detracts from their argument (and I acknowledge that there are some absolute clowns who cycle bikes, flout the rules of the road, have no consideration for others etc..... There are also plenty others who act the same in other forms of transport.....)

'They' ("cyclists") are grouped together as if it is the main defining thing about them, rather then the fact that they're just actually other people (humans) who are cycling, maybe for commuting, maybe for sport/leisure etc. The bit in red is actually a more accurate description, he was a guy who's very into cycling. How he can be a cyclist (unless it's his profession) while driving his car irresponsibly is just ridiculous and shows the bias in your argument.

Also this perception (only by one person thankfully from what I can see) that 'cyclists' go out of their way to specifically annoy other road users, rather than just going about their leisure activity/sporting pursuit, is panaoid & ridiculous in the extreme. What you might be observing is defensive riding (for good reason), and indeed in some cases, you may just encounter someone or a group who are very inconsiderate - but it's not because they are 'cyclists', it's because they are likely pricks as people full stop.

amcalester

magicbastarder wrote: »

AndrewJRenko is his own man and can speak for himself.

i have left details with a motorist before when she was in a collision with a cyclist. the cyclist wasn't best pleased, he assumed i'd side with a fellow cyclist.

If you're not careful you'll be excommunicated from the cyclist hive-mind.

magicbastarder

i already have the inside of my helmet lined in tin foil to exclude *any* interference with my brain patterns.

Podge_irl

meeeeh wrote: »

So basically in majority of cases you should be on the outside of the road and not middle of the road.

I don't for the life of me see what difference being in "secondary position" will have over being in "primary position" when it comes to overtaking. If you are one third the way into the carraigeway then the lane needs to be 4.2m wide before you could safely overtake, leaving 1m of space, without going across the central line anyway.

07Lapierre

Podge_irl wrote: »

I don't for the life of me see what difference being in "secondary position" will have over being in "primary position" when it comes to overtaking. If you are one third the way into the carraigeway then the lane needs to be 4.2m wide before you could safely overtake, leaving 1m of space, without going across the central line anyway.

What's the problem crossing the centre line? if its a broken line, you can (and should) move over and give a cyclist plenty of room. (assuming there is no oncoming traffic naturally)

Podge_irl

07Lapierre wrote: »

What's the problem crossing the centre line? if its a broken line, you can (and should) move over and give a cyclist plenty of room. (assuming there is no oncoming traffic naturally)

None. But once you are crossing the central line it doesn't really matter a damn where the cyclist is on the road as your ability to overtake is dependent only on it being safe to do so with no oncoming traffic.

partyguinness

Blazer wrote: »

It was a tongue in cheek response to the poster who posted the bike nonsense.
Strangely for the cyclists who mention the Netherlands a few lines they are pretty strictly with cyclists also.
Perhaps cyclists could learn a thing or two from their rules also?
And also the driver is presumed in the wrong ...not assumed.

https://www.holland.com/global/tourism/information/cycling-rules-in-holland.htm

'bike nonsense' is that what they call road safety in Ireland these days?

When you knock over a cyclist no Court will ever find in favour of a motorist. Guaranteed.

meeeeh

Podge_irl wrote: »

I don't for the life of me see what difference being in "secondary position" will have over being in "primary position" when it comes to overtaking. If you are one third the way into the carraigeway then the lane needs to be 4.2m wide before you could safely overtake, leaving 1m of space, without going across the central line anyway.

There are plenty that are not wide enough to have central line. It would be perfectly safe to overtake when cyclist is at the side of the road and completely unsafe if they are towards middle (again assuming there is no good reason to cycle in the middle of the road).

But in the end it doesn't matter of you see the difference or not, first third of the road is where you should cycle unless safety dictates otherwise.