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

Jogging on roads and cycle lanes.

98-00

How many people here jog on the road and cycle lanes? and why do they think they can?

As a cyclist I find this practice very dangerous. Don't joggers realise they are legally responsible for accidents and injuries caused to others by them jogging on the road.
This is becoming an increasing problem - stop it.

I had an incident a few months ago where three people were jogging all side by side the wrong way along the road. They all refused to move as I managed to stop 2 feet in front of them. Because they were 3 wide they took up the whole lane and I couldn't go around because of oncoming traffic in the opposite lane. There was a perfectly good footpath on one side of the road and a public field on the other, they seemed to think I was in the wrong for not getting out of their way.

I do realise that all joggers don't do this and I mention this because someone is going to mention cyclists on the footpaths, something I don't do.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Dr Turk Turkelton

Well op what about you and your two wheeled friends on the road when a cycle lane is provided?
Go and read the cycling forum and you will find all the stupid excuses your brethren come up with for it.
Let he who is without sin toss the first stone!

runawaybishop

Cuchulainn1. wrote: »

Well op what about you and your two wheeled friends on the road when a cycle lane is provided?

What about it? You don't have to use a cycle lane if it is unfit for purpose/dangerous.

seamus

runawaybishop wrote: »

What about it? You don't have to use a cycle lane if it is unfit for purpose/dangerous.

You don't have to use a cycle lane, period. The mandatory use law was repealed in October. They are now optional at all times.

OP, in terms of what the joggers are doing you'd have to ask them to find out why. I've certainly never seen this and the only time I would ever run on the road would be to skip past an obstacle on the path. Ditto for cycle tracks.

The formation you're describing leads me to believe that is a fitness bootcamp group or similar. I've seen them run on the roads in twos, but usually on quiet residential roads, and they usually break formation for oncoming traffic.

average_runner

seamus wrote: »

You don't have to use a cycle lane, period. The mandatory use law was repealed in October. They are now optional at all times.

Also there is no law saying you cant run in a cycle lane!

seamus

average_runner wrote: »

Also there is no law saying you cant run in a cycle lane!

Probably not, now that you mention it.

The ROTR states that footpaths must be used where they exist, though I'm increasingly distrusting of the ROTR as an authority on the ROTR.

I'll have a look at the relevant legislation...

dahat

Joggers and cyclists in conflict.......Shock horror!!!

average_runner

seamus wrote: »

Probably not, now that you mention it.

The ROTR states that footpaths must be used where they exist, though I'm increasingly distrusting of the ROTR as an authority on the ROTR.

I'll have a look at the relevant legislation...

Actually i could be wrong here, but doesn't the pedestrian always have the right of way?

Just remember this from a friend, he was driving his car and had a green light for turning left. The girl walked out in front of him and he hit her. She won the case based on that pedestrian has the right of way once they put their foot onto the road?

Now if you want to take on a car/bike on, best of luck.
Everyone just needs to be careful and work together.

Dr Turk Turkelton

runawaybishop wrote: »

What about it? You don't have to use a cycle lane if it is unfit for purpose/dangerous.

Up until last October it was mandatory to use a cycle lane when on a bike where one was provided.
Unfortunately that law was changed.Now if I'm driving I can't lay on the horn at cyclists disobeying it but if I'm running I will still keep my line on the road and make them swerve around me.(only where a lane is provides for them and they don't use it.)

AltAccount

98-00 wrote: »

How many people here jog on the road and cycle lanes? and why do they think they can?

As a cyclist I find this practice very dangerous. Don't joggers realise they are legally responsible for accidents and injuries caused to others by them jogging on the road.
This is becoming an increasing problem - stop it.

I had an incident a few months ago where three people were jogging all side by side the wrong way along the road. They all refused to move as I managed to stop 2 feet in front of them. Because they were 3 wide they took up the whole lane and I couldn't go around because of oncoming traffic in the opposite lane. There was a perfectly good footpath on one side of the road and a public field on the other, they seemed to think I was in the wrong for not getting out of their way.

I do realise that all joggers don't do this and I mention this because someone is going to mention cyclists on the footpaths, something I don't do.

Your one anecdote relates to a few months ago... Is this really the massive issue you're making it out to be?

seamus

average_runner wrote: »

Just remember this from a friend, he was driving his car and had a green light for turning left. The girl walked out in front of him and he hit her. She won the case based on that pedestrian has the right of way once they put their foot onto the road?

If you are turning left or right from road X to road Y, then you must yield to any pedestrians already crossing road Y as they have right of way, regardless of lights, etc. Of course I would prefer to stop mid-run and let the car turn rather than hope the driver knows the rules and stops for me.

Pedestrians crossing road X (i.e. the road you're on) do not automatically have right-of-way but in most cases the driver will be found at fault because they're driving a tonne of steel down the road so have a higher duty of care.

runawaybishop

Cuchulainn1. wrote: »

Up until last October it was mandatory to use a cycle lane when on a bike where one was provided.
Unfortunately that law was changed.Now if I'm driving I can't lay on the horn at cyclists disobeying it but if I'm running I will still keep my line on the road and make them swerve around me.(only where a lane is provides for them and they don't use it.)

Op mentions the joggers were on the wrong side of the road though

chinguetti

I cycle and i run. I run in cycle lanes against the traffic where i can see the cyclist coming at me and then i jump off the path and onto the pavement.

I run at night and i wear hi vis gear. I also wear lights and a hi vis vest while i cycle.

There's no conflict if you are sensible and there's plenty road for both in my mind. Cyclists and runners wearing black at night with no lights/hi vis gear and running or cycling where only a fool would is the problem. And you'll never change those people as they're never in an accident, they only cause them.

98-00

In relation to the joggers on the wrong side of the road, I was always told if you do have to walk on the road where a pavement is not provided you walk towards oncoming traffic - the idea being that you can see oncoming traffic and stand out of the way. The problem I had was that there was a perfectly good footpath and a field they could use or at least get onto till I passed.

rubadub

Cuchulainn1. wrote: »

Well op what about you and your two wheeled friends on the road when a cycle lane is provided?
Go and read the cycling forum and you will find all the stupid excuses your brethren come up with for it.

What sort of stupid excuses have you seen? I have read many threads but they usually make sense to me. Usually that the cycleway/cycletrack is not fit for purpose. If there is one I cycle on cycletracks/ways by the way, though I have a strong bike suited to what they are.

If I see a smashed up footpath or one covered in broken glass then I under stand why a pedestrian might choose to use the road or cycletrack instead. I would hope they would look around first.

I have no problem with most joggers, even the ones running with the traffic when its advisable to be against it. Its the ones running 2 abreast on cycletracks with their back to you. I roar out "HELLO" if coming up behind them.

average_runner wrote: »

Also there is no law saying you cant run in a cycle lane!

There is probably no law saying you cannot run with a knife or fart in a lift full of people, but cop on and common decency says not to do it.

Regardless of the law on cycletracks I always use them. Many are not even legally cycletracks due to incorrect signage so technically I am on footpaths. I do it for my own safety since I have seen crazy drivers having it in for cyclists who they think are doing something wrong/illegal.

hardCopy

Cuchulainn1. wrote: »

Up until last October it was mandatory to use a cycle lane when on a bike where one was provided.
Unfortunately that law was changed.Now if I'm driving I can't lay on the horn at cyclists disobeying it but if I'm running I will still keep my line on the road and make them swerve around me.(only where a lane is provides for them and they don't use it.)

As someone who runs in cycle lanes I'm surprised you can't appreciate why so many cyclists wouldn't use them.

Unless of course you're just trolling.

seamus

Right so, I've checked the legal bit;

Runners/Joggers/Walkers - Must use a footpath if it's provided, if not must run against the traffic. Are not legally prevented from running on cycle tracks, but can't run on cycle lanes unless there is no footpath.

Cyclists - Must not use the footpath. Can use cycle lanes or cycle tracks or the road at any time.

Vehicles - May not drive or park on a footpath or cycle track at any time. May not drive, stop or park in a cycle lane during the hours of operation.

But we all knew that right?

Darren 83

Id run on rural roads against traffic, and always use a footpath if there is one. Most drivers are grand about joggers on roads I never had a problem with them.

average_runner

98-00 wrote: »

In relation to the joggers on the wrong side of the road, I was always told if you do have to walk on the road where a pavement is not provided you walk towards oncoming traffic - the idea being that you can see oncoming traffic and stand out of the way. The problem I had was that there was a perfectly good footpath and a field they could use or at least get onto till I passed.

That is the usually rule but not official rule. Its also a common sense thing so you can see the bikes coming towards u.

One exception to that rule is if on a dangerous bend, you should go to the side you have a better view on!

Krusty_Clown

seamus wrote: »

Are not legally prevented from running on cycle tracks, but can't run on cycle lanes unless there is no footpath.

What's the difference between a cycle track and cycle lane? Is a cycle lane a section of the road separated by a solid or broken white line, while a cycle track is physically separated from the road?

plodder

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

What's the difference between a cycle track and cycle lane? Is a cycle lane a section of the road separated by a solid or broken white line, while a cycle track is physically separated from the road?

I wasn't aware of that distinction either. The ROTR seems to imply they are the same. So, I'm curious to find out.

When I looked into this before, the only obligation on pedestrians I could find was that you can't use the road if there is a footpath (fair enough) and a general rule on not acting the maggot, which is fair enough too - so running/walking three-abreast in a cycle lane is probably not allowed, but one person running at the edge of a cycle lane, probably is.

b.harte

98-00 wrote: »

In relation to the joggers on the wrong side of the road, I was always told if you do have to walk on the road where a pavement is not provided you walk towards oncoming traffic - the idea being that you can see oncoming traffic and stand out of the way. The problem I had was that there was a perfectly good footpath and a field they could use or at least get onto till I passed.

98-00 wrote: »

the idea being that you can see oncoming traffic and stand out of the way.

98-00 wrote: »

stand out of the way.

OR

Perhaps it might be so that oncoming traffic can see the jogger / walker / family pushing a buggy / walking the bloody dog etc and take the appropriate actions such as, but not limited to, checking for traffic over your shoulder, checking for traffic approaching you, adjusting your speed, indicating your intention to make a safe manoeuvre and pass the pedestrian in a safe manner, or allow yourself enough time / space to make a safe stop. But expect someone to stand out of your way?
Sewriously, that why you think people should face oncoming traffic, to get our of there way?
That's a fairly selfish attitude.

Now back OT, yes, if a pathway is provided it would have been better if they were on it, and running 3 across is as ignorant as expecting someone to stand out of your way, but you know what, some people are just ignorant.

AntiVirus

Joggers run on cycle lanes because cyclists don't use them. There's a ton of excuses as to why they don't use them but if they where that bad joggers wouldn't jog on them either. If cycle lanes where actually used by cyclists joggers wouldn't be jogging on them. Lucans full of cycle lanes but cyclists prefer to use the road, thats fine with me :-)

As for me I only run on the cycle lane when I'm passing people on the footpath and I only run on the road when passing people and cyclists at the same time :pac:

seamus

Sorry, legally they're all cycle tracks, but for simplicity on-road cycle tracks are often called cycle lanes. This is because on-road cycle tracks can sometimes be used by vehicles but off-road ones never can. So it's useful to make cycle lanes distinct from cycle tracks.

rom

Its very simple. Being polite to other users is the easiest option. Just count yourself luck that you don't have to deal with people who have extendable leads

drquirky

The term "jogger" is what I most take objection to in this thread.

hardCopy

drquirky wrote: »

The term "jogger" is what I most take objection to in this thread.

A jogger is anyone who runs slower than you.

dahat

rom wrote: »

Its very simple. Being polite to other users is the easiest option. Just count yourself luck that you don't have to deal with people who have extendable leads

Hurdle racing on the roads!!:D

runawaybishop

drquirky wrote: »

The term "jogger" is what I most take objection to in this thread.

I've heard of this. I believe it's "jogging" or "yogging". It might be a soft "J". I'm not sure but apparently you just run for an extended period of time. It's supposed to be wild.

Scotty #

seamus wrote: »

Right so, I've checked the legal bit;

Runners/Joggers/Walkers - Must use a footpath if it's provided, if not must run against the traffic. Are not legally prevented from running on cycle tracks, but can't run on cycle lanes unless there is no footpath.

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't pedestrians/joggers/anyone on foot ALWAYS have the right of way too? In other words a car must always yield to a pedestrian and likewise a cyclist to a jogger.

seamus

Legally, no.

A person on foot is required to check the way is clear before crossing the road and yield to oncoming traffic.

In practice it's more complex, but legally it's fairly straightforward.