Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

why don't not single file or at least give way??

2

Comments

  • #32
    Hermy
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 11,592 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hermy


    penexpers wrote: »
    Because maybe in this case the cyclists felt it wasn't safe?
    Absolutely agree with you penexpers when it isn't safe, but what about when it is safe and the group of cyclists still insist on taking up the entire lane? I don't believe it is appropriate for any road user to deliberately obstruct traffic without good reason.

    Genealogy Forum Mod



  • #33
    Macha
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,382 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    Hermy wrote: »
    That's a helpful comment.
    You're right. I took it out. My apologies.


  • #34
    311
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,332 ✭✭✭311


    For anyone who has a problem with a group of cyclists ,be greatful it's not a 70 year old massey ferguson drving down the road ,with a stink that would knock you out blowing into your car.:D


  • #35
    72hundred
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,333 ✭✭✭72hundred


    baza1976 wrote: »
    I applogise for the colour by the way. Still getting the hang of this.

    hah, the incident might have cost you 10 min's but reading and replying to this thread will cost you hours. haha.


  • #36
    DirkVoodoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,510 ✭✭✭✭DirkVoodoo


    Wow, it almost seems like you are trolling the cycling forum, I mean is there an actual point to this thread?

    I was dropping my brother to the bus the other night by car, came to the crossroads at foxrock village and stopped behind a megane at the red light.

    A car was double parked at the lights, slightly obscuring the young woman pushing a pram who was waiting for the pedestrian filter.

    The woman in front of me was obviously not paying attention, or maybe like you she assumed she had some God given right to do whatever she wants on the road and f**k anyone else, but the pedestrian lights all went green.

    Cue the megane driver going straight throught the pedestrian light and turning right while the young woman pushing the pram looks on in disbelief as she begins to cross.

    Now, aside from using this story to highlight what a fool you are, I did not go on to the boards motoring forum and post a topic about idiot drivers. Really what are you trying to achieve except rile the good people who use this forum to discuss bikes and cycling?

    I see idiot drivers, cyclists and pedestrians everyday, I've done a fair few idiotic things myself while either cycling, driving or walking. Yes we need better understanding, better enforcement of the law, etc. but I really for the life of me cannot understand what your post is meant to highlight?


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Dimitri
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 641 ✭✭✭Dimitri


    Personally i'm not bothered too much by the time spent waiting behind a group of cyclists, what i find far more frustrating is the extra concentration required to stay safely behind and to overtake them. However thats not really my issue with it as that can be said for being being a bad driver or a poorly loaded trailer or having some prick drive up behind with a headlight out of focus and so many other things. What i can't understand is the trend i've noticed in larger goups of cyclists to not show courtesy by making it easy for people to overtake instead choosing to take up an entire lane and on one occasion recently not to pull into the hardshoulder which really made me mad because it was on a national road at rush hour.
    I see idiot drivers, cyclists and pedestrians everyday, I've done a fair few idiotic things myself while either cycling, driving or walking. Yes we need better understanding, better enforcement of the law, etc. but I really for the life of me cannot understand what your post is meant to highlight?
    Apologies for jumping into this thread and fuelling things a bit but i'm genuinely curious as to why larger groups feel it necessary to take up an entire lane as opposed to cycling in single file or two abreast?


  • #38
    DirkVoodoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,510 ✭✭✭✭DirkVoodoo


    If larger groups of cyclists start stringing out to let cars pass, invariably what happens is the idiot motorist who happens to be passing tries some dangerous overtaking and has to swerve back in between cyclists when he meets oncoming traffic. I have seen this happen a few times (most of you who I have cycled with know that I end up the back of the bunch!) and it is almost undescribably dangerous. Simply put, bikes dont have the braking capacity of a car and it is much safer for the cyclists to stay in a tight group than in a long single file.

    Also, it is one of the rules of the eurocyclist not to show any emotion on your face, that is why they look like the don't care. Nothing personal.

    This thread is boring, I'm going back to the xmas drinks one!


  • #39
    RobFowl
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 11,669 Mod ✭✭✭✭RobFowl


    DirkVoodoo wrote: »
    Also, it is one of the rules of the eurocyclist not to show any emotion on your face, that is why they look like the don't care.

    :)


  • #40
    Dimitri
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 641 ✭✭✭Dimitri


    Well ya i can appreciate that i've seen a lot of overtaking being done that doesn't show the slightest understanding of the whole "when i pull out and floor i'll hit that car/corner up the road a lot sooner than at my current speed" ! But is it not possible to stagger the larger groups into say groups of 4 two abreast as opposed to an entire bunch to me at least it makes sense from both a safety and courtesy point of view. Also i have to ask and excuse my ignorance but why no emotion?


  • #41
    baza1976
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,145 ✭✭✭baza1976


    hi Dirkvoodo, I wasn't highlighting anything. I was asking a question. If you had bothered to read any of the replies it would have saved you time on as you put it yourself posting on this "boring thread".
    Also when you say" maybe like you she assumed she had some God given right to do whatever she wants on the road and f**k anyone else, but the pedestrian lights all went green" who is you? would it be me?? could you show me where i have given you that impression??


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    DirkVoodoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,510 ✭✭✭✭DirkVoodoo


    baza1976 wrote: »
    If you had bothered to read any of the replies it would have saved you time on as you put it yourself posting on this "boring thread".
    baza1976 wrote: »
    I now have an answer. I have no need to come back and read this thread

    Please, stop trolling. The fact you came on here in the first place is all the proof I need. "Oh, some cyclists p***ed me off today, I know what I'll do, I'll go to the cycling forum and impart some of my wisdom to the uneducated masses".

    Where is that ignore button again?


  • #43
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    Dimitri wrote: »
    But is it not possible to stagger the larger groups into say groups of 4 two abreast as opposed to an entire bunch to me at least it makes sense from both a safety and courtesy point of view.
    Courtesy may be defined as doing something you're not legally obliged to do, so as to convenience others.

    It's quite reasonable of you to request courtesy from cyclists.

    What courtesy will motorists show in return?

    Can I suggest not bringing a car into heavy traffic unless all seats in the vehicle are occupied? It's extremely frustrating when riding to work to find one's progress blocked the ludicrous amounts of road space used by single occupant cars.

    Can I suggest not parking on the road? It adds to the hazards of cycling, having to overtake parked cars, often unavoidably obstructing following cars in the process.

    Courtesy is a two-way street, gotta give some to get some.


  • #44
    kenmc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,283 ✭✭✭kenmc


    DirkVoodoo wrote: »
    Please, stop trolling. The fact you came on here in the first place is all the proof I need. "Oh, some cyclists p***ed me off today, I know what I'll do, I'll go to the cycling forum and impart some of my wisdom to the uneducated masses".

    Where is that ignore button again?
    Well said. He promised in Post 20 at 13:13 not to come back, yet here he is again and again.


  • #45
    baza1976
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,145 ✭✭✭baza1976


    Hi Dickvoodo,
    "some cyclists p***ed me off today, I know what I'll do, I'll go to the cycling forum and impart some of my wisdom to the uneducated masses". where you get this quote from? Didn't think this was the mind reading forum? I came on here to ask why would they not go single file or move aside. simple as that. I have got some good decent answers from both sides of the fence. And then I read some replies ranting and raving for me even thinking of coming into "their" forum and posting!!!

    If that question offended you I'm very sorry for upsetting you.

    Oh yeah.. you hang up first then I'll hang up :D


  • #46
    pipeliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 194 ✭✭pipeliner


    I had an incident a few years ago with a group of cyclists hogging the road with a hard shoulder on it. I felt that this was pure ignorance


  • #47
    baza1976
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,145 ✭✭✭baza1976


    Hi Kenmc,

    lol I tried not to come back. But I'm weak :D


  • #48
    kenmc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,283 ✭✭✭kenmc


    pipeliner wrote: »
    I had an incident a few years ago with a group of cyclists hogging the road with a hard shoulder on it. I felt that this was pure ignorance
    How so? It's illegal to drive on the hard shoulder.


  • #49
    pipeliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 194 ✭✭pipeliner


    they could have pulled in to let cars by. It was a straight stretch of road so their safety was more at risk on the road than the hard shoulder


  • #50
    Thomas_S_Hunterson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,151 ✭✭✭Thomas_S_Hunterson


    pipeliner wrote: »
    they could have pulled in to let cars by. It was a straight stretch of road so their safety was more at risk on the road than the hard shoulder
    :pac:

    It's illegal to drive on the hard shoulder.


  • #51
    kenmc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,283 ✭✭✭kenmc


    pipeliner wrote: »
    they could have pulled in to let cars by. It was a straight stretch of road so their safety was more at risk on the road than the hard shoulder
    :confused::confused::confused: Fail to see the logic in this. A straight stretch of road is the safest place for a bike. cars can see for miles in both directions, so it's easy to spot a safe place to pass. They *could* have pulled in to let cars pass. Then a police man *could* have pulled them all over for breaking the rules of the road. They *COULD* also have driven instead of cycling. They *COULD* have picked a different route. They didn't. Should have/would have/could have whatever. Let it go. It happened years ago.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,276 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    These "motorist complains about people riding two abreast" threads have cropped up a few times now and what I find really interesting is how defensive cyclists get. Everyone (myself included) starts pointing to the law, digging up diagrams, explaining at length on why we do it.

    Yet if I went on to the motors forum and started complaining about cars holding me up in heavy traffic and moaning about how little "respect" and "consideration" they show to cyclists by driving so close to the kerb, I'd be laughed out of the place, as I rightly should be. So it's funny to see us cyclists bending over backwards to try and defend a practice that a.) we're perfectly entitled to follow and b.) most of us find faster and safer.

    Look, I ride with cycling clubs, training groups, buches of friends all the time. For the most part we ride two abreast and it works just fine with cars overtaking us as they would any other slower moving vehicle. If traffic does start up to back up behind us we'd generally switch to single file, but sometimes it isn't a good idea, such as when the road is quite twisty or the group too big to make an overtaking manoeuvre safe if we were in single file.

    Roads are a shared space and bikes are just as entitled to be there as cars. Sometimes people don't drive or cycle with due consideration for other road users, but a lot of the time its just inevitable that someone is going to get held up for a bit. Yet at regular intervals this turns into high drama here.


  • #53
    pipeliner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 194 ✭✭pipeliner


    not if its to remove an obstruction to the traffic. In this case cyclists


  • #54
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    baza1976 wrote: »
    I came on here to ask why would they not go single file or move aside. simple as that.
    Ok, so let's ask you a question.

    Why do motorists park on the road? Isn't that even more inconsiderate than cycling two abreast?


  • #55
    kenmc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,283 ✭✭✭kenmc


    pipeliner wrote: »
    not if its to remove an obstruction to the traffic. In this case cyclists

    ref?


  • #56
    Macha
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,382 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    pipeliner wrote: »
    not if its to remove an obstruction to the traffic. In this case cyclists

    Captain, I seem to have located the problem: cyclists ARE traffic.


  • #57
    xz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,178 ✭✭✭xz


    According to the rules of the road http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/cyclists/cyclists_other-road-users.html
    4th quote in Do's column " Do cycle in single file if cycling beside another person would endanger, inconvenience or block other traffic or pedestrians."

    But my argument would be that it is more dangerous to overtake a long line of cyclists, rather than 2 abreast, as you , as a motorist, have further to travel to get past


  • #58
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,276 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Lads, while the Rules of the Road is sometimes inaccurate in interpreting legislation, here's what it says:
    A single broken yellow line along the side of the road:
    This road contains a hard shoulder, which is normally only for pedestrians and cyclists. If a driver wants to allow a vehicle behind them to overtake, they may pull in to the hard shoulder briefly as long as no pedestrians or cyclists are already using it and no junctions or entrances are nearby. Different rules exist or hard shoulders on motorways. See Section 11 for details.


  • #59
    cyclopath2001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭cyclopath2001


    xz wrote: »
    According to the rules of the road http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/rules-for-pedestrians-cyclists-motorcyclists/cyclists/cyclists_other-road-users.html
    4th quote in Do's column " Do cycle in single file if cycling beside another person would endanger, inconvenience or block other traffic or pedestrians."
    This is well-intentioned advice, not the letter of the law. The RoTR, misclassifies the recommendation as being law, but it's not backed up by the any such wording in the RT regulations.

    The actual law permits cycling two-abreast at all times except when overtaking traffic other than a cyclist and permits three abreast when overtaking another cyclist.

    The law does require everyone to be considerate towards everyone else though.

    The section in the RoTR about the hard shoulder on non-motorways is not actually backed by any law.


  • #60
    311
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,332 ✭✭✭311


    Deisetrek wrote: »
    I think the bottom line to this debate is that this motorist's impatience/ frustration or whatever exact wording he prefers to use has the potential to kill .... My frustration ( as a cyclist)on the road behaviour of a motorist certainly has less than no chance of fatal consequences , whereas his frustration could potentially kill somebody .
    Whilst I cycle alone ,and not in a group, I find it hard to sympthatise with this guy knowing how we are generally treated by a minority of motorists .

    The guy has absolutely no grounds to complain. If it was two girls cycling naked in front of him ,he'd be posting on the motoring forum boasting about it.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    xz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,178 ✭✭✭xz


    cyclopath2001 wrote: »
    This is well-intentioned advice, not the letter of the law. The RoTR, misclassifies the recommendation as being law, but it's not backed up by the any such wording in the RT regulations.

    The actual law permits cycling two-abreast at all times except when overtaking traffic other than a cyclist and permits three abreast when overtaking another cyclist.

    The law does require everyone to be considerate towards everyone else though.

    The section in the RoTR about the hard shoulder on non-motorways is not actually backed by any law.

    I never said it was law, and you didnt quote the rest of my post, which would not make me out to be some Philistine as your quotation did.
    If I am overreacting, maybe I have taken up your intention wrong.


Advertisement