Two cyclists injured – Indo comments section

Chuchote

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/two-cyclists-hospitalised-after-separate-dublin-rushhour-collisions-34971388.html

Extraordinary comments on the Independent's report of two cyclists being hospitalised after accidents; the commenters think cyclists shouldn't be on the road, only cars.

Lusk_Doyle

Never read below the article!

eeeee

Don't go there. Ever.

Weepsie

Absolute rag of a paper. I passed by Barry Egan today and it was enough to put in a bad mood

neris

any time i comment on the standard of their articles and "journalists" they always seem to remove the comments. pure gutter trash rag of a paper

Chuchote

Some saner comments this morning. The ones last night were… well, here's some:

Cyclists should not mix with motorised traffic --the have no drivers license--don't understand traffic rules and are a menace to safety and themselves

Someone needs to tell cyclists that there is no room for them in the city centre, and to kindly stop venturing in there

In these two cases you might as well expand that to the suburbs. As this,is where these accidents occurred

tamaskan

Sounds like the Journal.ie...need say no more.

Chuchote

It does… but the fact that these comments are submitted – however knuckle-dragging – means that the idiot radio hosts and sensation-fomenting feature writers who are arousing actual hatred for people on bicycles are having an effect. It's dangerous.

Jawgap

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

Never read below the article the Indo!

FYP

Edit:

I see they are at this rubbish again.......".....his bike collided with a car" (clearly the cyclist's fault then).

Chuchote

Jawgap wrote: »

FYP

Edit:

I see they are at this rubbish again.......".....his bike collided with a car" (clearly the cyclist's fault then).

One cyclist "collided with a car", the other is *believed* to have "collided with a parked car" (not stated if it was in the cycle lane or where it was, or in fact what is the basis of this belief.

Taxuser1

have to say there are a fair few knob ends on bikes though.

my pet hate as a cyclist and motorist is the throwing out of an arm (indicating) and moving out without looking over shoulder to see if there's oncoming traffic (car or bike or peloton)

i see this especially happens when a bus pulls into a stop and a cyclist goes to overtake, throws out the arm and moves right over into oncoming traffic

Lemming

Taxuser1 wrote: »

i see this especially happens when a bus pulls into a stop and a cyclist goes to overtake, throws out the arm and moves right over into oncoming traffic

Whilst I wont argue with you about people who simply do not indicate or indicate and move on a whim, regardless of whatever form of transport they're using, I do have to make a point about your above comment:

How many cars don't bother to indicate when overtaking a bus pulling over? The cyclist moving over is common sense for any road-user located between said bus & yourself and who wishes to overtake said bus. Why do you expect another road user who is in front of you to stop behind a bus just to allow you to overtake? You should be driving/cycling/riding/whatever as the conditions of the road allow. That means taking account of likely behaviour for traffic in and around you.

tomasrojo

Below-the-article comments are mostly graffiti. I'd give them about as much attention. Like graffiti, the pity is there is some quality in there, but it's crowded out by knobs.

tomasrojo

I like the idea (expressed below the line, as recounted above) that Dublin city centre is too crowded for bikes, but a-ok for all those tiny cars.

Taxuser1

Lemming wrote: »

Whilst I wont argue with you about people who simply do not indicate or indicate and move on a whim, regardless of whatever form of transport they're using, I do have to make a point about your above comment:

How many cars don't bother to indicate when overtaking a bus pulling over? The cyclist moving over is common sense for any road-user located between said bus & yourself and who wishes to overtake said bus. Why do you expect another road user who is in front of you to stop behind a bus just to allow you to overtake? You should be driving/cycling/riding/whatever as the conditions of the road allow. That means taking account of likely behaviour for traffic in and around you.

my context was strictly on the dangers to a cyclist by moving off/around without heed of what's coming up behind, regardless of the behaviour or rights of what's behind.

a typical Dublin Bus stop is in the way of a bike's path but not necessarily covers a car's path. While of course the car should take heed of what is ahead, a cyclist moving clearly around an obstacle off its own path and onto another line without looking first is just stupid, regardless of their entitlement to pass first. It was my only point, look first, then indicate.

salomon

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

Never read below the article!

never read the indo.

tomasrojo

You can follow @BestOfTheMail on Twitter to get only the very best of that particular mudhole.

They did this last year, which was amusing and disturbing, and unsuprising:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/10/hitler-quotes-in-the-comments-of-daily-mail-articles_n_7966560.html

Chips Lovell

Don't do it OP. You'd find a better standard of public debate on the jacks wall in Whelans.

Jawgap

Taxuser1 wrote: »

my context was strictly on the dangers to a cyclist by moving off/around without heed of what's coming up behind, regardless of the behaviour or rights of what's behind.

a typical Dublin Bus stop is in the way of a bike's path but not necessarily covers a car's path. While of course the car should take heed of what is ahead, a cyclist moving clearly around an obstacle off its own path and onto another line without looking first is just stupid, regardless of their entitlement to pass first. It was my only point, look first, then indicate.

....that's a motoring view point - if you're on the bike you are better connected to the environment and can hear what's behind and in proximity to you.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating that people cycle with eyes fixed firmly to the front, - they should be on the look out for all kinds of behaviour potentially detrimental to their safety, but the fact is on the bike you can use your ears to much better effect than when you are cocooned in the car.

Chips Lovell

You always, always need to look before changing your line. You can't rely on your ears.

ThisRegard

Taxuser1 wrote: »

have to say there are a fair few knob ends on bikes though.

my pet hate as a cyclist and motorist is the throwing out of an arm (indicating) and moving out without looking over shoulder to see if there's oncoming traffic (car or bike or peloton)

i see this especially happens when a bus pulls into a stop and a cyclist goes to overtake, throws out the arm and moves right over into oncoming traffic

You see a bus pull in with a cyclist behind, you should be automatically giving the cyclist space to go around anyway.

Taxuser1

Jawgap wrote: »

....that's a motoring view point - if you're on the bike you are better connected to the environment and can hear what's behind and in proximity to you.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating that people cycle with eyes fixed firmly to the front, - they should be on the look out for all kinds of behaviour potentially detrimental to their safety, but the fact is on the bike you can use your ears to much better effect than when you are cocooned in the car.

Leigh anois go curamach an text "my pet hate as a cyclist and motorist is the throwing out of an arm (indicating) and moving out without looking over shoulder to see if there's oncoming traffic (car or bike or peloton)"

I cycle quite fast. Someone who does a manoeuvre without looking behind to see what's coming up behind them puts me in danger because I might not be able to react in time but to counteract that I know there are cyclists who will move off so I take this into account. Just like a motorist does. It's frowned upon in track cycling yet the commuter because they've ears are entitled to do this ? That's absolutely ridiculous.

Even the safe cross code starts with Look.

Chips Lovell

ThisRegard wrote: »

You see a bus pull in with a cyclist behind, you should be automatically giving the cyclist space to go around anyway.

Actually, the person in the lane has right of way. It's up to the person moving into to only proceed if the way is clear.

mr spuckler

Jawgap wrote: »

....that's a motoring view point - if you're on the bike you are better connected to the environment and can hear what's behind and in proximity to you.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating that people cycle with eyes fixed firmly to the front, - they should be on the look out for all kinds of behaviour potentially detrimental to their safety, but the fact is on the bike you can use your ears to much better effect than when you are cocooned in the car.

i also see this all the time when on my bike and wouldn't necessarily give the people involved the credit of being very much in touch with what's around them. if i'm moving off my line on the bike i will always look over my shoulder to ensure it's safe to do so and expect other cyclists to do the same.

it is safer in all cases to look first, it also has the added benefit of showing the driver that you are aware of their position on the road and not contributing further to the view that cyclists just do as they please and ignore basic rules / etiquette.

2RockMountain

Chuchote wrote: »

It does… but the fact that these comments are submitted – however knuckle-dragging – means that the idiot radio hosts and sensation-fomenting feature writers who are arousing actual hatred for people on bicycles are having an effect. It's dangerous.

Cause or effect? I'm not sure which is feeding off which?

jon1981

Ignore the tripe in there.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/record-number-of-cyclists-commute-into-dublin-1.2656933

22,000 daily commutes in Dublin city. Do the moaning drivers want all these cyclists converted to motorists...?!


I hope the cyclists recover quickly and get back on the bikes...

Jammyc

tamaskan wrote: »

Sounds like the Journal.ie...need say no more.

For the sake of my own blood pressure, I had to uninstall the Journal.ie app from my phone. Whole thing is full of absolute moronic comments.

Chuchote

Taxuser1 wrote: »

have to say there are a fair few knob ends on bikes though.

Certainly true. Often enough when I and a crowd of other cyclists wait at a red light, someone – always, in my experience, a male between 16 and 30 – races through on a bike with an air of self-entitlement.

The difference is that many drivers don't see the 10 cyclists waiting for the lights to change, but only see the one narcissist, and use him as an example of what knob-ends 'cyclists' are.

And there's an awful lot of driversplaining around.

Jawgap

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

You always, always need to look before changing your line. You can't rely on your ears.

Hence my explanation - I wasn't advocating solely relying on your ears - simply stating a fact.....on the bike, unless you have earphones in, you are much better connected to the environment than when wrapped in the car, even if the radio isn't on and the kids aren't having a 'border dispute' in the back seat

I fully accept the need to keep one's head 'on a swivel' and in fact moving the head as you scan helps you judge sounds and the proximity of the objects that are the source of them better.

Taxuser1 wrote: »

Leigh anois go curamach an text "my pet hate as a cyclist and motorist is the throwing out of an arm (indicating) and moving out without looking over shoulder to see if there's oncoming traffic (car or bike or peloton)"

I cycle quite fast. Someone who does a manoeuvre without looking behind to see what's coming up behind them puts me in danger because I might not be able to react in time but to counteract that I know there are cyclists who will move off so I take this into account. Just like a motorist does. It's frowned upon in track cycling yet the commuter because they've ears are entitled to do this ? That's absolutely ridiculous.

Even the safe cross code starts with Look.

Well, I suppose I'm lucky I'm not a fast cyclist and I just rely on old fashioned anticipation, judgment and common sense - whether in the car or bike I try to think in terms of what might happen and position myself accordingly - if I thought someone was going to pull out to over take a decelerating or stationary bus I'd just hold back and let them do their thing - I like to cycle well within my reaction time.

BTW, I'm all for track cycling norms being incorporated into commuting - especially having a guy ride a motorbike in front of me to pace into work

tomasrojo

Chuchote wrote: »

And there's an awful lot of driversplaining around.

A word you didn't realise you needed until you saw it. Thanks!

Lemming

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Actually, the person in the lane has right of way. It's up to the person moving into to only proceed if the way is clear.

If you're on a road with two lanes I'd agree with you. But in most cases, that is not the case in urban areas; which means that the cyclist is in the same lane as the driver.