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

How not to cycle past a horse

Options
12467…11

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    eeeee
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 6,831 Mod ✭✭✭✭eeeee


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    Nonsense. Most of them were fine, as is evidenced by the video.

    Except they weren't. They were lucky they dangerously overtook an extremely calm and steady horse.

    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    Of course horses have every right to be on the road. Though as mentioned, you're making a hell of an argument for horses not being allowed on the road.

    I'm doing the exact opposite. I am asking for people to have a little consideration and understanding. You can pass horses safely. It is possible to pass them unsafely. Ignorance is the only excuse for passing horses unsafely, as with all passes in that video.


  • Options
    #93
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Ave Sodalis wrote: »
    Why is it nuts, and how is it an excellent argument for not allowing horses on the road? Thus far, the argument has been "they shouldn't be allowed because they inconvenience me" which I would have thought cyclists would have a little bit more understanding of. In much the same way cyclists should be overtaken wide in case of a wobble, a rider may need to be asked if their horse is safe to overtake. The horse has the right of way here. In doesn't take very long to be safe and often it's a case where the horse is fine. It's the one that's not that makes it dangerous for everyone involved.
    Sorry, but having to ask the permission of another road user to perform an overtaking manoeuvre as a standard practice in all situations is nuts. And it would be similarly nuts if it were required for overtaking pedestrians, cyclists or motor vehicles. As already acknowledged, some of the behaviour in that video is incredibly dangerous and inexcusable. Most of it isn't.


  • Options
    #94
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Hurrache wrote: »
    Doesn't at all. And if you think all those passes were fine you have a problem.
    As said repeatedly, they weren't all fine.


  • Options
    #95
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    rom wrote: »
    I am new to cycling and have mostly gone out with experienced people. Now there is zero training offered for a person that I know of that allows people to do some sort of training so they can cycle either to commute or recreationally on the road. I did contact the RSA about this as they have huge funding. I think most people want to do the right thing as no puts their lives in danger also. I am shocked that no one ever links to the cyclist training videos series. Is there any? Sorry if I am wrong but education is needed for both sides and I know very little on the correct things to do on a bike other than what I know from driving. People should not be just be learning the hard way.

    The RSA would never tell you stuff like taking the lane in certain situations and how not to be left hooked but stuff like that is vital and unfortunately is left for many to figure out for themselves. The best you can hope for from the RSA is wear a helmet and high vis and you'll be grand.


  • Options
    #96
    eeeee
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 6,831 Mod ✭✭✭✭eeeee


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    Sorry, but having to ask the permission of another road user to perform an overtaking manoeuvre as a standard practice in all situations is nuts. And it would be similarly nuts if it were required for overtaking pedestrians, cyclists or motor vehicles. As already acknowledged, some of the behaviour in that video is incredibly dangerous and inexcusable. Most of it isn't.

    You might want to have a read of the stature book:

    "
    PART V. ANIMALS ON ROADS.

    30 Driver's duty when passing animals

    30. A driver meeting or overtaking an animal on a road shall either reduce speed or halt the vehicle, if requested to do so (whether by signal or otherwise) by a person in charge of the animal."

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1964/si/294/made/en/print

    So the only traffic allowed on the road are ones you don't have to consider or be inconvenienced by?

    An extremely dangerous attitude to have on the roads, I really hope you never come across a novice horse or rider for the sake of theirs and your own safety.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,548 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    Sorry, but having to ask the permission of another road user to perform an overtaking manoeuvre as a standard practice in all situations is nuts. And it would be similarly nuts if it were required for overtaking pedestrians, cyclists or motor vehicles. As already acknowledged, some of the behaviour in that video is incredibly dangerous and inexcusable. Most of it isn't.


    No, all of it was dangerous.



    You have made no argument for actually banning horses on the road, other than it's not as easy as overtaking another car or pedestrian.


  • Options
    #98
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    Nonsense. Most of them were fine, as is evidenced by the video.

    That might be your opinion, but it's wrong.


  • Options
    #99
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users Posts: 6,483 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    nee wrote: »
    You might want to have a read of the stature book:

    "
    PART V. ANIMALS ON ROADS.

    30 Driver's duty when passing animals

    30. A driver meeting or overtaking an animal on a road shall either reduce speed or halt the vehicle, if requested to do so (whether by signal or otherwise) by a person in charge of the animal."

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1964/si/294/made/en/print

    So the only traffic allowed on the road are ones you don't have to consider or be inconvenienced by?

    An extremely dangerous attitude to have on the roads, I really hope you never come across a novice horse or rider for the sake of theirs and your own safety.

    I asked earlier but it probably got lost. Is a cyclist considered a “driver” in the stature book?


  • Options
    #100
    Hurrache
    Registered Users Posts: 10,165 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    Sorry, but having to ask the permission of another road user to perform an overtaking manoeuvre as a standard practice in all situations is nuts. And it would be similarly nuts if it were required for overtaking pedestrians, cyclists or motor vehicles.

    Straw man. It doesn't apply to any of those situations you outline.

    Your attitude here is odd given you only cried out for consideration and for the safety of cyclists in another thread within the last hour


  • Options
    #101
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Ave Sodalis wrote: »
    No, all of it was dangerous.
    No, it wasn't. Stop being so dramatic.
    You have made no argument for actually banning horses on the road, other than it's not as easy as overtaking another car or pedestrian.
    That's true.
    nee wrote: »
    You might want to have a read of the stature book:

    "
    PART V. ANIMALS ON ROADS.

    30 Driver's duty when passing animals

    30. A driver meeting or overtaking an animal on a road shall either reduce speed or halt the vehicle, if requested to do so (whether by signal or otherwise) by a person in charge of the animal."

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1964/si/294/made/en/print
    Indeed. And did you see any such request in the video, or was there even a suggestion of same?
    So the only traffic allowed on the road are ones you don't have to consider or be inconvenienced by?
    Not sure what this relates to.
    An extremely dangerous attitude to have on the roads, I really hope you never come across a novice horse or rider for the sake of theirs and your own safety.
    And likewise I hope you never have the power to enforce your crazy requirements.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    rushfan
    Registered Users Posts: 970 ✭✭✭rushfan


    cython wrote:
    I'm not missing that, but you're the one espousing irrelevant "wisdom" about group riding in an event which bans it. Or maybe it's the organisers' fault too for inadequate policing of that?

    Arcade_Tryer wrote:
    Sorry, but having to ask the permission of another road user to perform an overtaking manoeuvre as a standard practice in all situations is nuts. And it would be similarly nuts if it were required for overtaking pedestrians, cyclists or motor vehicles. As already acknowledged, some of the behaviour in that video is incredibly dangerous and inexcusable. Most of it isn't.


    No, it's not nuts! This was a horse, capable of inflicting serious injury or death to it's rider if sufficiently spooked. Slowing down to a crawl, especially on a narrow road , is showing consideration, courtesy, awareness of the situation, concern for the rider, etc.


  • Options
    #103
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Alessandro Round Steroid wrote: »
    That might be your opinion, but it's wrong.
    That might be your opinion, but it's wrong.
    Hurrache wrote: »
    Straw man. It doesn't apply to any of those situations you outline.
    Exactly, because it's a ridiculous requirement that would be laughed at by most people.


  • Options
    #104
    Hurrache
    Registered Users Posts: 10,165 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    rushfan wrote: »
    No, it's not nuts! This was a horse, capable of inflicting serious injury or death to it's rider if sufficiently spooked. Slowing down to a crawl, especially on a narrow road , is showing consideration, courtesy, awareness of the situation, concern for the rider, etc.

    Consideration is only a one way street for this particular poster.
    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    Stop being so precious. People are concerned about the safety of cyclists on the roads and those who would cause cyclists harm.


  • Options
    #105
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,548 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    No, it wasn't. Stop being so dramatic.


    I'm not being dramatic at all. I just know horses very well. That horse was behaving very very sensibly and I can say with complete confidence that those cyclists would not have come out so well with the majority of other horses. I'm not being dramatic one tiny little bit to be honest, and anyone who knows horses knows that I'm not.


  • Options
    #106
    Hurrache
    Registered Users Posts: 10,165 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    Exactly, because it's a ridiculous requirement that would be laughed at by most people.

    I think you've jumped the shark.


  • Options
    #107
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    rushfan wrote: »
    No, it's not nuts! This was a horse, capable of inflicting serious injury or death to it's rider if sufficiently spooked. Slowing down to a crawl, especially on a narrow road , is showing consideration, courtesy, awareness of the situation, concern for the rider, etc.
    There was plenty of space on the right hand side of the road to spin by the horse safely, which a lot of the cyclists did. A few idiots, and one or two special cases who went up the inside, did not give sufficient space and could have caused serious injury to others. This is not complicated, nor does it require ridiculous reactions such as demanding that road users stop and ask permission to overtake as some here have suggested.


  • Options
    #108
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    There was plenty of space on the right hand side of the road to spin by the horse safely, which a lot of the cyclists did. A few idiots, and one or two special cases who went up the inside, did not give sufficient space and could have caused serious injury to others. This is not complicated, nor does it require ridiculous reactions such as demanding that road users stop and ask permission to overtake as some here have suggested.

    Not only suggested here but the law requires it if asked for.


  • Options
    #109
    Glass fused light
    Registered Users Posts: 1,576 ✭✭✭Glass fused light


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    Nonsense. Most of them were fine, as is evidenced by the video.


    Of course horses have every right to be on the road. Though as mentioned, you're making a hell of an argument for horses not being allowed on the road.

    None of the people on the bikes made any effort to pass the horse safely.
    The first lot of single passes did not slow down, did not try to notify the rider, passed much too close to the side of the animal and cut back in much too early.
    As for the bunch they made no effort either and were lucky that they did not end up trampled.
    And the two others who did not give a sh1t if they killed the rider or the horse it would serve them right if they were charged with anything the local police could come up with.

    If you think that the passes were fine i suggest that you find a local stable or farm which has large animals and help move the animals around. The reason you check with the rider before passing is to ensure that the rider and animal are aware and fine with being passed. This is as much for the passers safety as the rider or horse. If a road user is incapable of using the roads while respecting other users needs it is they who should be removed.


  • Options
    #110
    tigerboon
    Registered Users Posts: 721 ✭✭✭tigerboon


    sin_26 wrote: »
    Once you try real racing you will understand how serious i am not to mention proper group ride. But yeah... It`s a horse in the middle of RACING.

    It's a race that comes across an animal in the road. The horse isn't in the middle of the race


  • Options
    #111
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Hurrache wrote: »
    Consideration is only a one way street for this particular poster.
    Safety on the road is the primary consideration for this particular poster. Trying to be clever by taking a post out of context from an entirely separate thread, and making an ad homniem attack based on that same post, is both childish, incredibly dishonest and rather pathetic.
    Ave Sodalis wrote: »
    I'm not being dramatic at all. I just know horses very well. That horse was behaving very very sensibly and I can say with complete confidence that those cyclists would not have come out so well with the majority of other horses. I'm not being dramatic one tiny little bit to be honest, and anyone who knows horses knows that I'm not.
    That's fair enough. But the reaction here to the entire video is similar to the person shrieking in the video after the collision at the end of the video; it's disproportionate.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,548 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Fighting Tao wrote: »
    I asked earlier but it probably got lost. Is a cyclist considered a “driver” in the stature book?


    I'm not sure about the stature book, but the RSA website don't differentiate between motors and other road users when it comes to approaching a horse


    http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Pedestrians-and-Cyclists/Horse-Road-Safety/


  • Options
    #113
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Not only suggested here but the law requires it if asked for.
    Did you see it asked for in the video? Was there even a suggestion of such a request?


  • Options
    #114
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users Posts: 6,483 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    Ave Sodalis wrote: »
    I'm not sure about the stature book, but the RSA website don't differentiate between motors and other road users when it comes to approaching a horse


    http://www.rsa.ie/en/RSA/Pedestrians-and-Cyclists/Horse-Road-Safety/

    Thank you. However, they’ve been wrong in the past. Either way I’m interested just because the word ‘driver’ jumped out st me. I don’t want to get involved in the arguments because that video clip is mental.


  • Options
    #115
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,548 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    That's fair enough. But the reaction here to the entire video is similar to the person shrieking in the video after the collision at the end of the video; it's disproportionate.


    She is shrieking because the horse is rearing and she has to stop it from barreling through the rest of those cyclists. The actions of the cyclists could have killed her, the horse and the cyclists themselves. It is not disproportionate at all when you realise the danger.


  • Options
    #116
    sin_26
    Registered Users Posts: 474 ✭✭sin_26


    cython wrote: »
    So given the amount of cycle races, triathlons, duathlons and adventure races where road closures are either unattainable, or will bump entry fees into the high hundreds of euro, you're happy to basically kill off events involving competitive cycling except at perhaps the elite levels? How forward thinking of you!

    How do you thinking if you generalise so much. Life is not black or white so as that situations. Fact is that real athletes are craving for competiton, either against time, themselfs or the others.

    Race- a COMPETITION between runners, horses, vehicles, etc. to see which is the fastest in covering a set course.

    Organisers are for some reason. Its clearly they fault.


  • Options
    #117
    HeidiHeidi
    Registered Users Posts: 28,863 ✭✭✭✭HeidiHeidi


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    Safety on the road is the primary consideration for this particular poster. Trying to be clever by taking a post out of context from an entirely separate thread, and making an ad homniem attack based on that same post, is both childish, incredibly dishonest and rather pathetic.

    That's fair enough. But the reaction here to the entire video is similar to the person shrieking in the video after the collision at the end of the video; it's disproportionate.
    I'm guessing that the rider was probably terrified - two riders had out of nowhere come up her inside, which would be fright enough - the horse got spooked and she probably was afraid it might bolt or rear up and throw her.


    I don't think her reaction was disproportionate in the slightest.


    I think your attitude is appalling, frankly.


  • Options
    #118
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    Did you see it asked for in the video? Was there even a suggestion of such a request?

    Did I suggest there was or say it was asked for ? Try harder is your score there fella.


  • Options
    #119
    plodder
    Registered Users Posts: 7,143 ✭✭✭plodder


    Jesus, that's an appalling video. Glad to learn it wasn't here. Every one of the cyclists in it showed a total lack of understanding of how to pass animals on the road.


  • Options
    #120
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Ave Sodalis wrote: »
    She is shrieking because the horse is rearing and she has to stop it from barreling through the rest of those cyclists. The actions of the cyclists could have killed her, the horse and the cyclists themselves. It is not disproportionate at all when you realise the danger.
    HeidiHeidi wrote: »
    I'm guessing that the rider was probably terrified - two riders had out of nowhere come up her inside, which would be fright enough - the horse got spooked and she probably was afraid it might bolt or rear up and throw her.


    I don't think her reaction was disproportionate in the slightest.


    I think your attitude is appalling, frankly.
    You both misunderstood. The point was that the person shrieked at being collided with, of which was a perfectly natural reaction of course, while some posters here are shrieking for the whole length of the video in terms of their responses. It's disproportionate.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    sin_26
    Registered Users Posts: 474 ✭✭sin_26


    tigerboon wrote: »
    It's a race that comes across an animal in the road. The horse isn't in the middle of the race

    Technically it did on some stage for sure.


Advertisement