Advertisement
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Cork SRR - Cyclist in Middle Lane

1…6791112…14

Comments

  • #242
    ItsLikeThis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 108 ✭✭ItsLikeThis


    Kaiser2000 wrote: »
    Ah that clown again. I've seen videos of his posted here before.

    Aside from the fact that there was no cycle lane on the road anyway for him to be whinging about, even when there was room to pass her (on either side), he sits behind her giving out :rolleyes: - the fella on the bike ahead of him manages to get past her without a drama funnily enough!

    But a perfect example of some of the attitudes on this thread.

    Those kind of videos don't sit well with me, her road positioning wasn't great, but what laws did she break? She was entitled to use her lane. Did she deserve to end up on youtube for slightly inconveniencing a couple of cyclists? I know its filming in a public place but surely there has to be a point when it becomes invasion of privacy?


  • #243
    _Kaiser_
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 29,798 ✭✭✭✭_Kaiser_


    ItsLikeThis wrote: »
    Those kind of videos don't sit well with me, her road positioning wasn't great, but what laws did she break? She was entitled to use her lane. Did she deserve to end up on youtube for slightly inconveniencing a couple of cyclists? I know its filming in a public place but surely there has to be a point when it becomes invasion of privacy?

    Not forgetting the irony here..

    Cyclists complaining about cars not letting them past - but then saying they should be allowed hold cars up themselves because they're "just as entitled to be there" :rolleyes:


  • #244
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Kaiser2000 wrote: »
    Ah that clown again. I've seen videos of his posted here before.

    Aside from the fact that there was no cycle lane on the road anyway for him to be whinging about, even when there was room to pass her (on either side), he sits behind her giving out :rolleyes: - the fella on the bike ahead of him manages to get past her without a drama funnily enough!

    But a perfect example of some of the attitudes on this thread.


    FWIW I never overtake stationary or slow-moving vehicles as shown in the video.

    I believe 'undertaking' has now been made legal for cyclists, but I don't know why I'd bother in such a situation.


    Kaiser2000 wrote: »
    Not forgetting the irony here..

    Cyclists complaining about cars not letting them past - but then saying they should be allowed hold cars up themselves because they're "just as entitled to be there" :rolleyes:

    Not the same group of people?


  • #245
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    Kaiser2000 wrote: »
    Not forgetting the irony here..

    Cyclists complaining about cars not letting them past - but then saying they should be allowed hold cars up themselves because they're "just as entitled to be there" :rolleyes:

    It seems that some of the subtleties have gone whooosh over your head.

    Cyclists are complaining about slow or stopped cars not letting them past - cars that aren't going anywhere themselves, but opt to block other traffic by virtue of selfish road positioning.

    Cars are complaining about cyclists holding them up, because they are in a mad rush to get past the cyclist to the back of the queue at next line of cars.


  • #246
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    RainyDay wrote: »
    Cyclists are complaining about slow or stopped cars not letting them past - cars that aren't going anywhere themselves, but opt to block other traffic by virtue of selfish road positioning.



    Or just sheer numbers, even in fine weather.

    A motorist complained to me recently (on enquiry from me) that I had gone in front of her on a roundabout. Traffic is stationary or slow-moving on the same roundabout every morning, so she was going nowhere fast anyway. When I asked her how I was supposed to access the road ahead without passing by the numerous cars clogging the roundabout, she said "take it to the Council". I realised later she was just peeved at seeing a bike nipping past her Chelsea tractor during "rush" hour.


  • Advertisement
  • #247
    dantastic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 395 ✭✭dantastic


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    A motorist complained to me recently (on enquiry from me) ...

    You were picking a fight with someone in a car because a car should make room for cycles when cyclists should take up the full lane? Something like that?


  • #248
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    I was accompanying my child while cycling to school one morning. As we waited to cross a busy road where no pedestrian crossing has been provided despite Bord Pleanala orders issued several years ago, a woman in an SUV drove by. I noticed she was shaking her head at us as she passed.

    Inevitably I caught up with her at the next junction (a roundabout, inevitably) because it is inevitably clogged with cars every morning. Curiosity got the better of me, and I went up to her window indicating that I wanted to ask her something. She rolled down the window and we had a brief chat. I asked her whether there was something amiss and she said that I had gone in front of her on the same roundabout the previous day.

    When I pass that way every school morning the roundabout is obstructed with stationary or slow-moving vehicles. By slow-moving I mean travelling at less than walking pace. Motorists jam up the roundabout because they try to squeeze in every way they can. Traffic simultaneously enters the roundabout from three arms and exits on one. Right-turning motorists use both 'lanes' of the roundabout. Very often the cars are three 'abreast' on the roundabout.

    The "cycle lanes" on either side are discontinuous, and the only way through for bikes is to weave through whatever random gaps are available. The "courtesy crossings" for pedestrians (and child cyclists) are routinely obstructed, again making it necessary to find, or wait for, gaps suitable for crossing through.

    I asked Mrs SUV how I was supposed to traverse the junction without passing through the gaps between cars. Her irritable reply was "take it up with the Council." I cycled off and left her there, still sitting in traffic. It was only later that it dawned on me that this woman was merely p:ssed off that I had gone ahead while she had to remain stationary.


  • #249
    Donnelly117
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Donnelly117


    Should have known this thread would soon boil down to a cars vs cyclists debate sooner or later... Since I've seen this hundreds of times on boards I think ill call it a day on this one...


  • #250
    blackwhite
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 9,923 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    I was accompanying my child while cycling to school one morning. As we waited to cross a busy road where no pedestrian crossing has been provided despite Bord Pleanala orders issued several years ago, a woman in an SUV drove by. I noticed she was shaking her head at us as she passed.

    Inevitably I caught up with her at the next junction (a roundabout, inevitably) because it is inevitably clogged with cars every morning. Curiosity got the better of me, and I went up to her window indicating that I wanted to ask her something. She rolled down the window and we had a brief chat. I asked her whether there was something amiss and she said that I had gone in front of her on the same roundabout the previous day.

    When I pass that way every school morning the roundabout is obstructed with stationary or slow-moving vehicles. By slow-moving I mean travelling at less than walking pace. Motorists jam up the roundabout because they try to squeeze in every way they can. Traffic simultaneously enters the roundabout from three arms and exits on one. Right-turning motorists use both 'lanes' of the roundabout. Very often the cars are three 'abreast' on the roundabout.

    The "cycle lanes" on either side are discontinuous, and the only way through for bikes is to weave through whatever random gaps are available. The "courtesy crossings" for pedestrians (and child cyclists) are routinely obstructed, again making it necessary to find, or wait for, gaps suitable for crossing through.

    I asked Mrs SUV how I was supposed to traverse the junction without passing through the gaps between cars. Her irritable reply was "take it up with the Council." I cycled off and left her there, still sitting in traffic. It was only later that it dawned on me that this woman was merely p:ssed off that I had gone ahead while she had to remain stationary.

    Great story - you met a c**t.

    What that has to do with a lunatic with a death wish cycling in the incorrect lane on the SRR in Cork I'm not sure though :confused:

    Unless you think some mongo driving in Galway means it's ok for a cyclist to act like an idiot in Cork :rolleyes:


  • #251
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    See post #236 and subsequent.


  • Advertisement
  • #252
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Donnelly117 wrote: »
    Should have known this thread would soon boil down to a cars vs cyclists debate sooner or later... Since I've seen this hundreds of times on boards I think ill call it a day on this one...


    Sooner, as in post #20 which you thanked: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=87913076&postcount=20


  • #253
    blackwhite
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 9,923 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    See post #236 and subsequent.

    All of which is completely irrelevant to the topic.


  • #254
    blackwhite
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 9,923 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    Sooner, as in post #20 which you thanked: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=87913076&postcount=20

    That post certainly isn't Cyclists V Motorists.
    It very clearly refers to the "lunatic fringe" - now if you think that the word "fringe" means that he is refering to all, or even most, cyclists then you really need to go back to school and brush up on your English comprehension.

    But don't let anyone get in the way of the usual agenda-pushing.... it's not like you ever let small inconveniences like common sense or facts get in the way of your soap-box anyway


  • #255
    Red Belly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 195 ✭✭Red Belly


    Followed this for a while with amusement. I cycle and I drive. The cyclist was probably within his rights but put himself in a dangerous situation or was forced into a dangerous situation by poor road design/planning. By slowing down and/or tailing back, the drivers acted responsibly and accommodated the situation the cyclist found himself in despite probably being pissed off about it.

    This is a good news story: "Cyclist in dangerous situation, possibly not of his own making, survives because of responsible drivers reacting appropriately".

    rb


  • #256
    The Bishop Basher
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭The Bishop Basher


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    Inevitably I caught up with her at the next junction (a roundabout, inevitably) because it is inevitably clogged with cars every morning. Curiosity got the better of me, and I went up to her window indicating that I wanted to ask her something. She rolled down the window and we had a brief chat.

    Yeah. So you picked a fight.

    You're not cycleddub by any chance are you ?


  • #257
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Swanner wrote: »
    Yeah. So you picked a fight.

    You're not cycleddub by any chance are you ?


    No and no.


  • #258
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    blackwhite wrote: »
    it's not like you ever let small inconveniences like common sense or facts get in the way of your soap-box anyway


    You've found me out. I'm always making stuff up and I never back up my arguments with evidence.


  • #259
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    It made Joe Duffy's show today. Large momentum building against cyclists, or at least their attitude on the roads.


  • #260
    Anan1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,770 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    It made Joe Duffy's show today. Large momentum building against cyclists, or at least their attitude on the roads.
    There's always a large momentum on Joe Duffy. Meanwhile, more and more people are cycling. Which, incidentally, means fewer cars.


  • #261
    Red Nissan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,055 ✭✭✭Red Nissan


    Anan1 wrote: »
    There's always a large momentum on Joe Duffy. Meanwhile, more and more people are cycling. Which, incidentally, means fewer cars.

    I used to cycle, loved it but eventually gave it up, too many near misses, I hitting two cars and three cars hitting me ~ a bit of paint damage and a few buses sort of events.

    I'm forced to walk for medical reasons and I can't cross the road, the volume of traffic is just horrendous, pedestrian crossing will ALWAYS see at least one car that will not see me and not see the stopped traffic and drive through, cyclist are silent and I'm scared by them several times a day as whiz past at considerable speed.


  • Advertisement
  • #262
    blackwhite
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 9,923 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    Red Nissan wrote: »
    It made Joe Duffy's show today. Large momentum building against cyclists, or at least their attitude on the roads.

    The vast majority of cyclists have a fairly decent attitude on the road. The problem is a visable minority that ignore the rules of the road (red lights in particular), ignore common courtesy, and generally act the dick. The problem arises because most motorists seem to only notice the ones acting the c**t.

    The fact that the Joe Duffy show prefers to weed out the more rational callers before giving them airtime will generally tend to result in a lynch mob being formed.

    There does seem to be a major defensiveness amongst many "good" cyclists about any criticism of any cyclists - most likely because so many of the people doing the criticising like to generalise about "all cyclists" - but even in instances when the criticism is justified it seems to be taken as criticism of the collective, not the individual who was being a dick.

    **I drive nearly every day and cycle once or twice a week - I'd love to be able to cycle to work, but until we move to an office with a shower the distance I commute (uphill for most of the way there as well) would make it very unpleasant for my coworkers :P


  • #263
    The Bishop Basher
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭The Bishop Basher


    I never had a problem with cyclists in the past but they are becoming more and more of a nuisance lately. Everything from the hordes of lycra clad "tour de France" wannabes taking up huge sections of road at the weekends to the arseholes on their daily commute who seem to take delight in taking up a full lane and slowing you down to 30km when in reality there's plenty of room for everyone if they'd just move in and demonstrated a sense of common courtesy. Not all cyclists are like this obviously but the bad ones do seem to be growing in numbers.

    It's bad enough witnessing this on a daily basis but for some reason the majority of cyclists posting on boards seem to translate the arrogant and defensive "we have our rights and will exercise them so screw everyone else" attitude from real life to here. Again not all but it does seem like most and it's clearly demonstrated once again on this thread.

    A serious change of attitude would do much to help their cause and help us all get along and make the roads a much safer place to be but it doesn't look like happening anytime soon.

    Of course there are bad drivers as well and they should be dealt with appropriately but I think the difference is you will often see motorists come down like a ton of bricks on other motorists when they admit to dangerous driving or breaking the rules on here. All we get from cyclists is defense of the indefensible, arrogance and a screw you attitude to every other road user.


  • #264
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    Swanner wrote: »
    A serious change of attitude would do much to help their cause and help us all get along and make the roads a much safer place to be but it doesn't look like happening anytime soon.

    Of course there are bad drivers as well and they should be dealt with appropriately but I think the difference is you will often see motorists come down like a ton of bricks on other motorists when they admit to dangerous driving or breaking the rules on here. All we get from cyclists is defense of the indefensible, arrogance and a screw you attitude to every other road user.


    Speaking purely for myself, I would not try to defend the indefensible.

    I am interested in understanding road user behaviour, however. Just today I spoke to three cyclists who were travelling against the flow of traffic on a cycle path. What they were doing might not have been blatantly illegal, nor was it particularly dangerous (at least not when I encountered them) but it was certainly unorthodox and it was not what I would do. Each was a pleasant individual and far from being a reckless muppet. Each had a plausible explanation for their behaviour, which had to do with ease of access along their route.

    That said, let's keep a bit of perspective on the subject. What are the primary sources of danger on Irish roads? You might find some answers here: http://www.rsa.ie/RSA/Road-Safety/Our-Research/Collision-Statistics/


  • #265
    The Bishop Basher
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭The Bishop Basher


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    That said, let's keep a bit of perspective on the subject. What are the primary sources of danger on Irish roads? You might find some answers here: http://www.rsa.ie/RSA/Road-Safety/Our-Research/Collision-Statistics/

    Naturally cars are the biggest source of danger on the road. There's a lot of them and they move at speed. If bicycles were as numerous, heavy and fast as cars they'd be right up there in the stats.


  • #266
    _Kaiser_
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 29,798 ✭✭✭✭_Kaiser_


    Swanner wrote: »
    I never had a problem with cyclists in the past but they are becoming more and more of a nuisance lately. Everything from the hordes of lycra clad "tour de France" wannabes taking up huge sections of road at the weekends to the arseholes on their daily commute who seem to take delight in taking up a full lane and slowing you down to 30km when in reality there's plenty of room for everyone if they'd just move in and demonstrated a sense of common courtesy. Not all cyclists are like this obviously but the bad ones do seem to be growing in numbers.

    I've noticed this more lately too. Previously you could pretty much "ignore" a cyclist (as in move out slightly, overtake and be past them without any problems or delays to either party), but more and more I find myself being forced to dawdle behind them as they sit in the middle of the lane or 2/3 abreast until you can find a suitable gap to overtake (which given most suburban roads are lined with parked or stopped cars isn't always easy).

    There's a reason why places like Holland and Germany have invested in dedicated and separated cycle infrastructure. Busy (narrow and/or poorly surfaced) roads and slow moving, poorly-lit (in many cases), cyclists with zero professional training, testing or insurance is not a good mix given the volume of traffic on the roads nowadays.

    If cyclists want to share the road "equally" they should undergo the same theory and (equivalent) testing as motorists. They should also be required to be insured. If a cyclist smashes my wing mirror while undertaking or weaving between traffic there's pretty much feck all I can do about it .. yet if I clipped them I'd face the full weight of the law, personal injury claims and insurance penalties.


  • #267
    Donnelly117
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,485 ✭✭✭Donnelly117


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    Sooner, as in post #20 which you thanked: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=87913076&postcount=20

    Eh no...the post I thanked was a discussion relevant to the topic of the thread. Now you are just bitching about a fight you picked with some guy in a car. You are past the point of discussing the original topic and now you're just here to wind people up.


  • #268
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 24,740 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    Kaiser2000 wrote: »

    If cyclists want to share the road "equally" they should undergo the same theory and (equivalent) testing as motorists. .

    the vast majority of cyclists also drive so have undergone the same training and testing


  • #269
    The Bishop Basher
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭The Bishop Basher


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    the vast majority of cyclists also drive so have undergone the same training and testing

    And your data source for this is ?

    Even of you could prove that the majority of cyclists are also drivers, that would still leave a significant number of cyclists on the road that have had no training whatsoever.

    In other words, your point is invalid.


  • #270
    Anan1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,770 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    Swanner wrote: »
    And your data source for this is ?

    Even of you could prove that the majority of cyclists are also drivers, that would still leave a significant number of cyclists on the road that have had no training whatsoever.

    In other words, your point is invalid.
    I realize that none of us has the figures to hand, but do you really think that most cyclists don't drive?


  • Advertisement
  • #271
    The Bishop Basher
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭The Bishop Basher


    Anan1 wrote: »
    I realize that none of us has the figures to hand, but do you really think that most cyclists don't drive?

    I have no idea and nor have you. Until you can back up the claim that most cyclists drive with real figures, the point is invalid.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement