Professional Viewpoint Please

Hagar · 24-06-2009 05:58PM #1

May I ask for comments from members on the following post made by a cyclist. The general topic was the rights and wrongs of cyclists cycling two abreast.

I was overtaken by a vehicle last Sunday when there was not safe room to do so and I was struck by the vehcile. I spent most of the week in hospital and still in severe pain.

In my humble opinion the standard of driving in Ireland is too poor to leave the decision on whether it is safe to over take a cyclist or not up to the motorists and cyclists should make that decision for motorists and block the overtaking, passively, when needs be.

How are the actions of cyclists blocking overtaking as described above viewed by the Gardaí?

Hooch · 24-06-2009 06:19PM

Hagar wrote: »

May I ask for comments from members on the following post made by a cyclist. The general topic was the rights and wrongs of cyclists cycling two abreast.

How are the actions of cyclists blocking overtaking as described above viewed by the Gardaí?

The cyclist has the same right (if not more) to the road as an MPV driver. Cycling two abrest, while not the best idea in Ireland it is totally legal.

On the blocking issue once the cyclist stays inside the white line on his own side, and doesnt sway back and forth then there is nothing wrong.

Car drivers (myself included) are very impatient with cyclists and have the idea they shouldnt be on the road or should stop to allow cars overtake. The truth is it is normally the motorist whos wrong.

24-06-2009 07:39PM

nice guy always wrote: »

The cyclist has the same right (if not more) to the road as an MPV driver. Cycling two abrest, while not the best idea in Ireland it is totally legal.

On the blocking issue once the cyclist stays inside the white line on his own side, and doesnt sway back and forth then there is nothing wrong.

Car drivers (myself included) are very impatient with cyclists and have the idea they shouldnt be on the road or should stop to allow cars overtake. The truth is it is normally the motorist whos wrong.

I thought it was an offence? I'll have to go looking at the legal books again!

And if it is not an offence it's rude and dangerous. You have to be carefull enough as it is passing one cyclist never mind two.

I knew there was something about this. Rules of the road. It's in the table.

TheNog · 24-06-2009 07:43PM

In my humble opinion the standard of driving in Ireland is too poor to leave the decision on whether it is safe to over take a cyclist or not up to the motorists and cyclists should make that decision for motorists and block the overtaking, passively, when needs be.

That is the most idiotic statement I have ever seen

We will see when he tries this on a pissed off driver. Im sure he would not be long on his bike

24-06-2009 07:50PM

Could we prosecute the cyclist for Section 51(A) RTA?

Hooch · 24-06-2009 08:44PM

foreign wrote: »

I thought it was an offence? I'll have to go looking at the legal books again!

And if it is not an offence it's rude and dangerous. You have to be carefull enough as it is passing one cyclist never mind two.

I knew there was something about this. Rules of the road. It's in the table.

Its not an offence and dont forget, the ROTR are guidlines and not legislation 4. But I agree its rude and dangerous.

The bike course was a big eye opener for me as a driver, to the dangerous faced by cyclists and how badly people driver and try to force cyclists in. Thats why in the AGS course you thought to keep + 2 feet from the grass margin, so as to allow yourself manovering ability if some fool tries to overtake on a bend etc.

foreign wrote: »

Could we prosecute the cyclist for Section 51(A) RTA?

Section 51, 52 and 53 apply to pedal cycles. There is no mention of MPV, its vehicle. A pedal cycle is a vehicle.

Hagar · 24-06-2009 09:00PM

Many thanks for the responses lads & lasses, it's very interesting to hear how you guys view some things. Joe Public, myself included, often has a view on things that has no basis in law. And common sense is nowhere as common as it should be.

Hooch · 24-06-2009 09:11PM

TheNog wrote: »

That is the most idiotic statement I have ever seen

We will see when he tries this on a pissed off driver. Im sure he would not be long on his bike

You were passed over for the mountain bike course so????:p:D

If you were driving and you knew that a bad bend was coming up and a car was about to try and overtake would you stay where you are or deter the vehicle by moving out to the white line (safely)

Or take if you came up to a hidden dip and saw a car enter it heading towards you. Now another car comes up behind you and you think he might over take....would you let him or deter him by staying out to the line???

Its a bigger picture people and every incident has its own merits, so dont take it that im backing the cyclist or the driver. Every incident is different. I've seen a whole lot of cyclists driving like retards.....but I have also seen a hell of a lot of drivers preforming crazy overtakes of vehicles of all kind. (as im sure ye all have seen).

Always look at the bigger picture and dont assume that someone is wrong right off (a wise man once said assumption is the mother of all f**k ups).

Zuppy · 24-06-2009 09:49PM

IMO - being a cyclist, cars generally have no respect for a cyclist or don't even see them sometimes. I would have no problem with moving out in the lane (when approaching a bad bend) to protect myself.

To me the most dangerous part of my cycle is on the main road/ dual carriageway, while I might be going straight on the cars wishing to use the filter lane, undertake me, overtake me or feel like I should be exiting with them and start to move into the filter lane and force me to go too.

I wonder why we don't have a cycle helmet law in Ireland though? Around have the cyclists I see don't wear any.

deadwood · 24-06-2009 10:57PM

"So lads, where's this Hagar live?

Nog, you check for foreidn shport literature. Nice Guy Always, check his "organic" garden. And lads, don't be gettin caught bringin the shtuff in, ok?

Someone else keep sketch for indymeejia.

Right lads. Thick Counthry formation. We shtop for no man nor beasht!

I'll give the sh1t stirrer two abreasht"

sdanseo · 24-06-2009 11:01PM

In my humble opinion the standard of driving in Ireland is too poor to leave the decision on whether it is safe to over take a cyclist or not up to the motorists and cyclists should make that decision for motorists and block the overtaking, passively, when needs be.

I agree with Nog above and I'll go a step further (I may not be a professional as Hagar asked for but it has to be said): You can drag all the laws of the land out to prove that the above is legal. In the end though, this is the the real world and if you're going to be that stupid you will eventually get flattened and it will be the cyclists' fault. Not because the car driver is in the right, not because they may not be breaking the law but because they're in a bloody car and you're not.

Hooch · 24-06-2009 11:34PM

sdonn wrote: »

I agree with Nog above and I'll go a step further (I may not be a professional as Hagar asked for but it has to be said): You can drag all the laws of the land out to prove that the above is legal. In the end though, this is the the real world and if you're going to be that stupid you will eventually get flattened and it will be the cyclists' fault. Not because the car driver is in the right, not because they may not be breaking the law but because they're in a bloody car and you're not.

And theres where your non professional advice comes in. if a car hits another car from behind for no reason whos at fault????

Same goes for cyclists. Thay have every right to the road as cars do. Hell animals have more right to the road dan cars do!!!

sdanseo · 24-06-2009 11:37PM

nice guy always wrote: »

And theres where your non professional advice comes in. if a car hits another car from behind for no reason whos at fault????

Same goes for cyclists. Thay have every right to the road as cars do. Hell animals have more right to the road dan cars do!!!

Well, I aspire to be a professional in the area but that doesn't quite cut it :P

All I'm saying is that while the law is the law, and fair enough, a little bit of cop on is needed too.

Hooch · 24-06-2009 11:42PM

sdonn wrote: »

Well, I aspire to be a professional in the area but that doesn't quite cut it :P

All I'm saying is that while the law is the law, and fair enough, a little bit of cop on is needed too.

Sure and I agree....but it has to be from both cyclists and drivers. Both have equal rights. The only road in the state that are designed and lawfully for MPVs are motorways.

TheNog · 25-06-2009 01:54AM

nice guy always wrote: »

You were passed over for the mountain bike course so????:p:D

If you were driving and you knew that a bad bend was coming up and a car was about to try and overtake would you stay where you are or deter the vehicle by moving out to the white line (safely)

Or take if you came up to a hidden dip and saw a car enter it heading towards you. Now another car comes up behind you and you think he might over take....would you let him or deter him by staying out to the line???

Its a bigger picture people and every incident has its own merits, so dont take it that im backing the cyclist or the driver. Every incident is different. I've seen a whole lot of cyclists driving like retards.....but I have also seen a hell of a lot of drivers preforming crazy overtakes of vehicles of all kind. (as im sure ye all have seen).

Always look at the bigger picture and dont assume that someone is wrong right off (a wise man once said assumption is the mother of all f**k ups).

I do agree with what you are saying BUT

:pac: as far as Im concerned, as I didnt make very clear in my first post, my safety is my first priority. If Im the cyclist and a driver seems hell bent on overtaking me dangerously then I say let him off. There is no way in hell would I move me and my bicycle further into a lane to try to passively prevent a car from overtaking me.

Call me a Me Feiner but I dont want to be rear-ended and injured with me lying on the road with a broken neck thinking to myself "I did the right thing" while ur man in the car has torn off.

My 2 cents

Chips Lovell · 25-06-2009 08:49AM

TheNog wrote: »

I do agree with what you are saying BUT :pac: as far as Im concerned, as I didnt make very clear in my first post, my safety is my first priority. If Im the cyclist and a driver seems hell bent on overtaking me dangerously then I say let him off. There is no way in hell would I move me and my bicycle further into a lane to try to passively prevent a car from overtaking me.

Call me a Me Feiner but I dont want to be rear-ended and injured with me lying on the road with a broken neck thinking to myself "I did the right thing" while ur man in the car has torn off.

My 2 cents

Actually, it's safety that prompts cyclists to take the lane. Those drivers hell bent on overtaking sometimes do it on a corner when they can't see what's coming in the other lane. Some of my scariest moments on a bike have been when cars overtaking me have suddenly swung in on top of me because they have spotted someone coming in the other direction. And thats far more likely to happen than someone simply riding into the back of me because they can't overtake.

blorg · 25-06-2009 10:52AM

What Tonto says. Incidents of cars driving straight into the back of cyclists are exceedingly rare. Side swiping is far more common. It is not a matter of actively trying to block anyone but rather taking a road position that ensures you are visible and forces safe overtaking (as well as providing a space to the left for the cyclist to swerve into in an emergency situation.)

From my own personal experience you are far more likely to be overtaken too close if you are hugging the kerb than if you are out a bit. Additionally, if you are out a bit and you are overtaken too close, you have somewhere to go to your left. If you are hugging the kerb and you are overtaken too close you have nowhere to go. This is my own experience, cycling a bit further out is actually safer.

To overtake safely a car driver is required to give a cyclist 'the same room as they would give a car' - 1.5m is recommended and in other jurisdictions this is actually a legal requirement. On most roads where cyclists two abreast is even an issue in the first place this means that the car driver has to cross the centre line. If the driver is crossing the centre line the other side of the road must be free of oncoming traffic and the driver must be able to see that it is clear for at least as long as their overtake will take. If the other side of the road is free of oncoming traffic then it is _easier_ to pass cyclists cycling two abreast than in single file as there is a shorter distance to pass.

BostonB · 25-06-2009 11:14AM

Most drivers have no realisation or perspective of the cyclist so don't understand why they do certain things.

I find that sometimes its not very obvious as a driver that the kerbside 2~3ft has a surface rougher than the moon. But as a cyclist its too rough to stay on, so they need to stay further out.

Like wise most drivers don't realise why its dangerous for cyclists to stay too close to the kerb all the time, and that its safer for the cyclist to block the lane, say at junctions or narrow sections of road.

I find theres lots of drivers have very poor spatial awareness, and thus drive far closer to cyclists than they realise.

The Govt could put some safety adverts on the TV highlighting these things it would help a lot.

Hooch · 25-06-2009 12:00PM

blorg wrote: »

From my own personal experience you are far more likely to be overtaken too close if you are hugging the kerb than if you are out a bit. Additionally, if you are out a bit and you are overtaken too close, you have somewhere to go to your left. If you are hugging the kerb and you are overtaken too close you have nowhere to go. This is my own experience, cycling a bit further out is actually safer.

+1

Exactly whats thought by AGS in the mountain bike course

Chips Lovell · 25-06-2009 12:01PM

What's AGS?

Hooch · 25-06-2009 12:04PM

el tonto wrote: »

What's AGS?

Sorry An Garda Síochána

silverharp · 27-06-2009 08:10AM

el tonto wrote: »

Actually, it's safety that prompts cyclists to take the lane. Those drivers hell bent on overtaking sometimes do it on a corner when they can't see what's coming in the other lane. Some of my scariest moments on a bike have been when cars overtaking me have suddenly swung in on top of me because they have spotted someone coming in the other direction. And thats far more likely to happen than someone simply riding into the back of me because they can't overtake.

that seems reasonable, there are certain roads where you know you just dont want to be overtaken when on a bike so I take the attitude that it is better to be positive about it and stay in the middle of the lane otherwise you just risked being buzzed on one side or some prat opening a car door on the other.

Professional Viewpoint Please

Comments