cycling on a pedestrian bridge

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

I hatr having to do this but....

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So you're more bothered that i was in no way all that bothered about either myself or other people I claim to be conertned about and went back for another coffee? :rolleyes:

chanelfreak

Not sure why some posters are taking exception to the fact that the OP posted about his experience this morning - this is a discussion board, right?

Secondly, that cyclist was a complete w*nkbag - I don't believe the OP ever tarred ALL cyclists with the w*nkbag brush, just the one he met this morning.

OP fair play to you for not engaging with that idiot this morning - hope the poor woman with the buggy was ok after that fright.

Sheldons Brain

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

I disagree that they are bigger d*cks than other road users. I think that the bad behaviour of drivers (parking up on the kerb, using mobile phones which driving, accelerating to make the red and then running it) is so ingrained that it has become normal and not noticed any more. And that surely is the ultimate arrogance.....that a driver no longer even feels the need to defend the actions, as they are perceived as normal acceptable behaviour. Therefore cyclists stand out more.

Who is defending these things? I'm not.

The only defending on this thread is cylists justifying breaking the law.
.

tnegun

Is this him OP?

https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/attachments/744437/351064.jpg

Timberrrrrrrr

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I hatr having to do this but....

Let's look at the facts shall we?

I am a pedestrian on a pedestrian bridge

Mother and child are pedestrians on a pedestrian bridge

Cyclist barrels across the pedestrian bridge at high speed

Just about swerves and misses mother and small child

Turns around to angrily shout at them because they didn't move out of his way

Drifts across bridge (still at speed, now not looking where he is going) and crashes into me.

I am lucky enough not to be badly injured due to this guys actions yet you feel outraged that i had the audacity to turn around, cross the road and get myself another coffee and head off to work?

AH at it's finest :rolleyes:

Samaris

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I hatr having to do this but....

You could just not do it then.. Especially since you don't have to at all. What's your obsession with their coffee, for heaven's sake? If I'd just gotten a nasty fright and lost my morning caffeine in the process, and I still had time, you can bet your ass I'd be getting another one. Have you missed your morning coffee and are just madly jealous of another person having it? :P I have coffee. Niiiice coffee. *offers some coffee to* There, we're all happy now.

Edit: Also, paranoia central about OP's cyclist status. Conspiracy theory forum's over there.

not yet

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Well you must read everything i post if you can claim you have never seen me mention that I cycle in over 6000 posts.

Well in all fairness we have had more then one conversation about cycling on another blog, and not once in the past 2 years have I heard you mention it..

But now you're a ''cyclist'' doesn't add up.

Timberrrrrrrr

not yet wrote: »

Well in all fairness we have had more then one conversation about cycling on another blog, and not once in the past 2 years have I heard you mention it..

But now you're a ''cyclist'' doesn't add up.

You talk about racing and going out with a club, I mentioned that I have a bike and occasionally cycle to work. Go check again, if nothing else it will give you something to do for the day.

not yet

chanelfreak wrote: »

Not sure why some posters are taking exception to the fact that the OP posted about his experience this morning - this is a discussion board, right?

Secondly, that cyclist was a complete w*nkbag - I don't believe the OP ever tarred ALL cyclists with the w*nkbag brush, just the one he met this morning.

OP fair play to you for not engaging with that idiot this morning - hope the poor woman with the buggy was ok after that fright.

How the fcuk do you know the cyclist was a wnakbag, please do tell...

Did you see the cctv footage ? Were you on the other footpath ? did you just happen to be passing.....

I'll take a rough guess and say no to all of the above, but carry on calling people wnakbags that you have never met based on the post of some lady with an agenda..

Samaris

Without proof either way, we can probably assume the person telling the story is telling the truth, unless it's proven otherwise. No names have been mentioned, no-one's suffering from this. Why assume s/he's got an agenda (what is her agenda anyway?). If someone tells you it's raining, do you assume they're probably telling the truth, or do you immediately thing "hm, they have an agenda. They must not want me to go outside!" and sidle over to the window to check?

chanelfreak

Well aren't you a delight not yet? Charming.

Maybe in your mind, almost knocking down a woman with a small child, abusing her for having the audacity not to get out of your way and THEN crashing into an innocent bystander crossing the PEDESTRIAN bridge to go to work are the actions of a non w*nkbag. If that's the case, then I am very glad not to have the pleasure of knowing you in real life.

Happy Friday!

not yet

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You talk about racing and going out with a club, I mentioned that I have a bike and occasionally cycle to work. Go check again, if nothing else it will give you something to do for the day.

Racing..:eek: Going out with a club :eek:

Don't think so pal, check again...

MrStuffins

not yet wrote: »

How the **** do you know the cyclist was a wnakbag, please do tell...

Based on the story i'd guess. If what she says is true, he IS a w*nkbag. even if only the part about cycling on the bridge is true.

There's no reason to thing the OP is lying.

not yet

Samaris wrote: »

Without proof either way, we can probably assume the person telling the story is telling the truth, unless it's proven otherwise. No names have been mentioned, no-one's suffering from this. Why assume s/he's got an agenda (what is her agenda anyway?). If someone tells you it's raining, do you assume they're probably telling the truth, or do you immediately thing "hm, they have an agenda. They must not want me to go outside!" and sidle over to the window to check?

Experience...

pmasterson95

Well the attitude of cyclists blaming everyone else is clearly alive and well here. Think they proving OP's point tbf. Cyclists are truly a bizzare lot. At least the ones on boards.

Samaris

not yet wrote: »

Experience...

Experience that OP persistently makes things up as part of her apparent anti-cyclist agenda? Do you follow her around with a CCTV camera or something?

Timberrrr, spotted a furtive-looking chap/chappess following you around Dublin lately?

BizzyC

not yet wrote: »

How the **** do you know the cyclist was a wnakbag, please do tell...

Did you see the cctv footage ? Were you on the other footpath ? did you just happen to be passing.....

I'll take a rough guess and say no to all of the above, but carry on calling people wnakbags that you have never met based on the post of some lady with an agenda..

Hold on, where is this agenda?

OP has posted about a single incident and has only spoken about this particular person in isolation, there has been no effort on their part to generalise against cyclists in general.

You're the one who seems to have an agenda here, even though you don't have cctv or your own eye witness account of the events.

Zillah

It never ceases to amaze me how people happily decide that it is ok to judge all cyclists by the behaviour of one or a couple, but if you did it with, say, drivers or white people they'd roll their eyes and say you're being ridiculous.

not yet

chanelfreak wrote: »

Well aren't you a delight not yet? Charming.

Maybe in your mind, almost knocking down a woman with a small child, abusing her for having the audacity not to get out of your way and THEN crashing into an innocent bystander crossing the PEDESTRIAN bridge to go to work are the actions of a non w*nkbag. If that's the case, then I am very glad not to have the pleasure of knowing you in real life.

Happy Friday!

Oh so now I'm the charming one, I didn't use the term wnakbag without knowing the full story or seeing the incident first hand, but carry on calling strangers wnakbags..

I'm glad your glad it makes me happy, in fact I'll go as far as to say it's made my Friday, nay my weekend, happy, happy happy....

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime

check_six wrote: »

The signs are probably just a reminder of the regular rules of the road. If you are crossing another lane you must give way to traffic already in that lane. This is just standard practice.

However, you can see where the confusion would arise at this junction. The cycle track layout is particularly bad as the cyclist approaching the junction gets hidden behind a bus stop just before they are dumped into the edge of the left turning lane. This means that the cyclist is even more invisible than usual coming to the most dangerous part of any cycle track, a road junction.

Some road engineers will fudge the design by placing a yield sign for cyclists continuing straight on, but this is just perverse. Imagine the same set up for a car where the car has to yield to other vehicles that may or may not cut across its path. In this junction they try to give the bike normal priority, but the fact they hide the cyclist at the critical moment I would guess has caused a lot of near misses here.

My own instinct is to avoid the cycle track here altogether as it is too dangerous, cardboard sign or not. Also, based on your question, it may not be clear in some car driver's heads who has priority here based on the poor layout. I blame the road engineers for the inconsistent and contradictory layouts all over this stretch of road.

Do cyclists not have to yield right of way ?

pmasterson95

not yet wrote: »

How the fcuk do you know the cyclist was a wnakbag, please do tell...

Did you see the cctv footage ? Were you on the other footpath ? did you just happen to be passing.....

I'll take a rough guess and say no to all of the above, but carry on calling people wnakbags that you have never met based on the post of some lady with an agenda..

Were you?
I'll take a rough guess and say no to all of the above, but carry on blaming the victim that you have never met based on the post of some lady with an agenda.....

Timberrrrrrrr

Samaris wrote: »

Experience that OP persistently makes things up as part of her apparent anti-cyclist agenda? Do you follow him around with a CCTV camera or something?

Timberrrr, spotted a furtive-looking chap/chappess following you around Dublin lately?

FYP

not yet

MrStuffins wrote: »

Based on the story i'd guess. If what she says is true, he IS a w*nkbag. even if only the part about cycling on the bridge is true.

There's no reason to thing the OP is lying.

''If'' is a huge,huge word

circadian

I cycle every day and you do see some idiots about, regardless of their choice in transport. I'll take my bike on to a path/pedestrian area if needs be but I'm rolling slowly I'd never dream of hoofing it down a pedestrian area, just asking for trouble.
EDIT:Only if the area is quiet, otherwise I'll get off and push.

Although yesterday my bike got clipped by some tool looking down at his phone, he didn't notice and was long gone before I could catch a reg. Blue Peugeot 307 though, I'll be keeping an eye out.

Yeah OP you get idiots in all walks of life. A bit of courtesy and manners can take you a ling way, some people have forgotten this.

Samaris

Huh, I must have picked up ..ah, "lady with an agenda", that's where. Funny how subconscious works, I must have picked up "her" without even noticing

Edit: I'm afraid more than just me's doing it now. You may have to put up with being considered to be a woman for a bit!

Edit to the edit: Hey, anyone think that "not yet" might actually be the rogue cyclist?

Cookie_Monster

not yet wrote: »

How the fcuk do you know the cyclist was a wnakbag, please do tell...
.

he cycles on the footpath despite it being illegal. QED

not yet

Samaris wrote: »

Experience that OP persistently makes things up as part of her apparent anti-cyclist agenda? Do you follow her around with a CCTV camera or something?

Timberrrr, spotted a furtive-looking chap/chappess following you around Dublin lately?

Long, long story....to long to go into here.

Rackstar

There are decent cyclists but I'm coming across more and more self obsessed cyclist pr1cks that own the roads, footpaths, cycle lanes, and everything else for that matter. They'll gladly hold you up all day and get in your way but don't dare get in the bikes way.

not yet

pmasterson95 wrote: »

Were you?
I'll take a rough guess and say no to all of the above, but carry on blaming the victim that you have never met based on the post of some lady with an agenda.....

Please, please please show me were I blamed the ''victim''...

No.

ok then we'll move on.

Plasid

--LOS-- wrote: »

For the posters who find themselves generalising all cyclists, would you watch this video, it's an Australian video but still very relevant

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Td8zLMWU4Y

QFT

pmasterson95

not yet wrote: »

Long, long story....to long to go into here.

Thats convenient. I have proof but they cant be explained but believe me agenda.

Boom_Bap

I'm going to talk about my journey home yesterday on my bike.

First:
I was going through a roundabout, actually on it, but a motorist not even on the roundabout appeared to put the foot down and hammer past my back wheel just to try scare me. This could be just my imagination. But the roundabout was well clear as I entered, and he was nowhere near the point of yielding.

Second:
A car parked on the opposite side of the road, facing the same way as I was travelling decided to do a 3 point turn, didn't look (or look hard enough) and came accross the road straight into my path.
I stopped sharpish, the driver didn't see me until he had finished his turn and was pulling off, neither had his passanger.

Third:
A motorist turning left accross my path without looking

Fourth:
A motorist in a SUV on their phone drifting to the kerb, straightening up and swerving in again. This was slowish moving traffic and I had to make sure to stay behind the car, if I passed, I'd be crushed.

That was all in the space of 45 minutes. I'm a casual cyclist and it's easy to see why there is so much hostility from cyclists on this type of subject.
But the dude on the bridge was a dick, pure and simple.

Timberrrrrrrr

not yet wrote: »

Long, long story....to long to go into here.

Holding a grudge over a 2 year old thread in s forum that no longer exists and now you feel the need to claim i am lying over something you didn't see. You need to move on lad because that's just not healthy for you.

pmasterson95

not yet wrote: »

Please, please please show me were I blamed the ''victim''...

No.

ok then we'll move on.

Please please answer were you there to be so certain the cyclist wasnt a wnakbag?

Second time lucky?

Or do we move on.

not yet

pmasterson95 wrote: »

Please please answer were you there to be so certain the cyclist wasnt a wnakbag?

Second time lucky?

Or do we move on.

You said I blamed the victim, I asked you to show me............

Boom_Bap

MOD
Yes, move on from this 'w@nkbag' discussion.
Don't drag discussion from another forum into this one.

check_six

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »

Do cyclists not have to yield right of way ?

In this case no. They are continuing straight on and the left turning vehicles are turning across another lane (the cycle track).

However, cycle track layouts are an inconsistent jumble due to poor planning. This is why it is generally safer to cycle on the regular lane so that there is no confusion. You are in the straight ahead lane, you have priority over turning vehicles. No confusion.

If you're in a cycle track, especially one on a footpath, your right of way can be blurred by bad layouts. This makes the cycle track more dangerous than the road, which seems like a contradiction, but there ya go!

not yet

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Holding a grudge over a 2 year old thread in s forum that no longer exists and now you feel the need to claim i am lying over something you didn't see. You need to move on lad because that's just not healthy for you.

Not a grudge, just an intense dislike for people who are nasty, and thanks for your concern I'm as healthy as fcuk..

Grandpa Hassan

This was all over twitter before the newspapers picked it up. And the guys 'cycle friendly' coffee bars have been crucified on social media. If anyone looks at @brew cafe on twitter they'll see the reaction

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/driver-who-launched-road-rage-tirade-at-cyclist-suffers-torrent-of-abuse-online-10292123.html

But to continue the general tone and intelligence of this thread......this driver is an aggressive d*ck who nearly took out a cyclist then threatened to kill him, therefore all drivers are aggressive d*cks with rage issues

Samaris

not yet wrote: »

You said I blamed the victim, I asked you to show me............

I will!

You repeatedly inferred that the OP was lying about the incident for Reasons, and then later implied that the OP is a habitual liar with no proof whatsoever (edit: oh, and now "nasty"). Saying that the person is lying when they make an accusation is a type of victim blaming, insofar as it is squashing the OP for daring to speak at all. And just using Dramatic Ellipsis isn't actually proof, and is actually less convincing than a basic full stop.

Good gods, I can't believe this thread is worth trolling. It was a yarn of something that happened this morning, not someone trying to end the world. If you have such a major issue with the OP, why not just avoid them, rather than go out of your way to engage /eyeroll

boombang

I liked your post Timberrrrrrrr and think it's totally legit and shouldn't have been kicked off the cycling forum.

Indulge us with more details: did the cyclist actually incur injuries and or coffee? Any further details on the exchange afterwards?

NachoBusiness

Just an hour ago I witnessed one of these Lycra wearing twats get outraged by something he could have avoided. Old lad with a young kid, I'd say his grandchild, standing at the back of their car in the car park out in Clontarf which happens to have a cycle lane running past it. I was walking along beside the coast maybe twenty feet away and could see this Sean Kelly wannabe crouched low, shoulders and knees going ninety with his eyes firmly on the old boy and then just as he got withing three feet he swerves out of the way, massively exaggerating his actions to imply a near miss and then turns his head back and starts shouting something at the guy about it being a 'fcukking cycle lane'. You'd swearing the chap had wandering out into a stage of the Tour De France the way he was going on. I was only drinking a Capri Sun and so had nothing hot to fcuk at him, but I would have, I would have. Course, I don't have Fatima Whitbread's arms either so I most likely would have missed.

Oh and those courier cyclists with the white cart.. hooligans the lot of 'em.

Samaris

Boom_Bap wrote: »

MOD
Yes, move on from this 'w@nkbag' discussion.
Don't drag discussion from another forum into this one.

Oops, I missed that one too

Timberrrrrrrr

boombang wrote: »

I liked your post Timberrrrrrrr and think it's totally legit and shouldn't have been kicked off the cycling forum.

Indulge us with more details: did the cyclist actually incur injuries and or coffee? Any further details on the exchange afterwards?

Coffee went all over him as he hit me, he then crashed to the ground and recieved a cut above his eye that imo would require stitches or glue. Exchange afterwards was mostly him screaming at me about how I should have moved out of the way and he gad it all on video and would be going to the guards.

BizzyC

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

But to continue the general tone and intelligence of this thread......this driver is an aggressive d*ck who nearly took out a cyclist then threatened to kill him, therefore all drivers are aggressive d*cks with rage issues

All I can see is people saying "this particular cyclist was a pr!ck" followed by 3 or 4 posts of "OMG!! You guyz are all ignorant to generalise cyclists!".

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Let's look at the facts shall we?

I am a pedestrian on a pedestrian bridge

Mother and child are pedestrians on a pedestrian bridge

Cyclist barrels across the pedestrian bridge at high speed

Just about swerves and misses mother and small child

Turns around to angrily shout at them because they didn't move out of his way

Drifts across bridge (still at speed, now not looking where he is going) and crashes into me.

I am lucky enough not to be badly injured due to this guys actions yet you feel outraged that i had the audacity to turn around, cross the road and get myself another coffee and head off to work?

AH at it's finest :rolleyes:

Not outrage in the slightest.

Just observing the fact that the coffee and this thread was more important to you than what you say was more important to you.

The stupid ****wit is probably going to do it again. Why? Because no one challenged him and he got away with it the first time.

not yet

Samaris wrote: »

I will!

You repeatedly inferred that the OP was lying about the incident for Reasons, and then later implied that the OP is a habitual liar with no proof whatsoever (edit: oh, and now "nasty"). Saying that the person is lying when they make an accusation is a type of victim blaming, insofar as it is squashing the OP for daring to speak at all. And just using Dramatic Ellipsis isn't actually proof, and is actually less convincing than a basic full stop.

Good gods, I can't believe this thread is worth trolling. It was a yarn of something that happened this morning, not someone trying to end the world. If you have such a major issue with the OP, why not just avoid them, rather than go out of your way to engage /eyeroll

So now not believing someone or thinking they have an agenda is blaming the victim...

Well done you..

KTR1C

SpaceTime wrote: »

He gave me a tirade of abuse and bad language. My passenger (an old lady) was absolutely horrified and wanted to go to the Gardai about it, but sure what can you do?!

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say, REPORT IT !! :rolleyes:

Timberrrrrrrr

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Not outrage in the slightest.

Just observing the fact that the coffee and this thread was more important to you than what you say was more important to you.

Well since you were not there you don't know what my priorities were, you don't know that i asked the girl if her and her child were ok. Yes i got another coffee, then i went to work, then i sat at my computer and took 3 minutes out of my morning to post an amusing (imo) synopsis of what happened.

The stupid ****wit is probably going to do it again. Why? Because no one challenged him and he got away with it the first time.

I dunno about that, maybe the scar will be a reminder to him in future.

pmasterson95

I wonder if it was a car vs. pedestrians would the avid motorists leap to the defence of each other. It seems no matter what theres a squad of cyclists ready to claim innocence no matter what the circumstance. You can't criticise Cyclists.