Journalism and cycling

buffalo

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Should I bother listening to it?

Do you suffer with low blood pressure?

It's a case of empty vessels etc. with her. Instant mute button if I ever hear her on media these days after the disgusting comments she made on one of the TV panel shows last year.

Tenzor07

gavinoontheweb wrote: »

A difficult listen at times, I'd say Verona queen of the hauliers felt like the 3 lads we're ganging up on her. She started of fairly reasonable, taking a wider view of how to increase numbers cycling. Ended up with the classic 'sure what are we going to do with the cyclists weaving in and out of VEHICKLES'

Jeesus will they stop giving "Veruka the truck lady" a platform to spread her passive-aggressive manner of ... oh yes we want road safety for cyclists so long as they wear full hi-vis clothing, a helmet and oh, if they could all load up their bicycles into a car and go cycle around a park, now wouldn't that be wonderful, oh and make them take a theory test and wear a sticker to let the nice patient and caring drivers know they still don't deserve to share "our" roads...

ED E

She's Veruka the candidate now.

tomasrojo

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Jeesus will they stop giving "Veruka the truck lady" a platform to spread her passive-aggressive manner of ... oh yes we want road safety for cyclists so long as they wear full hi-vis clothing, a helmet and oh, if they could all load up their bicycles into a car and go cycle around a park, now wouldn't that be wonderful, oh and make them take a theory test and wear a sticker to let the nice patient and caring drivers know they still don't deserve to share "our" roads...

Safe, legal and rare

Unknown Soldier

To be fair, that Off The Ball cycling chat wasn't the worst I have heard. At least there wasn't a George Hook'esq Devils advocate complaining about cyclist in general. It was quite Dublin based, as far as I could tell, and they all agreed that the current cycle paths and lanes are for the most part, not fit for purpose, and dangerous in some places.

As for the Trucker lady, maybe from what I had read here in the past, I was expecting a very different stance from her, but I actually found her to be quite reasonable, for the most part. There was nothing about cyclist shouldn't be on the road etc, holding up traffic.

One thing that does irk me about these panels, I have yet to hear from a knowledgeable and competent cyclist. They never seem to put across the points well, in my opinion.

All that aside, My text message that the Media not using Cycling as click bait by stirring up anti-cycling hate ala George Hook & the.Churnal.ie would help, didn't get read out

Hurrache

Unknown Soldier wrote: »

As for the Trucker lady, maybe from what I had read here in the past, I was expecting a very different stance from her, but I actually found her to be quite reasonable, for the most part. There was nothing about cyclist shouldn't be on the road etc, holding up traffic.

It's how she operates. She says something that may well be sensible, but then follows it up with something outlandish or extreme as a tactic for the latter to seem more reasonable.

Tombo2001

IN ALL FAIRNESS

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1123306639417860098

You can see why people think cyclists are headbangers when you look at this.

I (personally) have a fairly strong view that
(i) Cycling is the mode of transport of choice for international students when they come to Dublin. Deliveroo employs many from this cohort.
(ii) A very high proportion of these students - compared to say cyclists that are commuting to the work place - are in the category of no helmet, no lights, no hi viz, and doing some crazy stuff... in other words the stereotype that is routinely applied to ALL cyclists.

Also


Gas how they blacked out the Deliveroo logo :-)

Seth Brundle

Tombo2001 wrote: »

A very high proportion of these students - compared to say cyclists that are commuting to the work place - are in the category of no helmet, no lights, no hi viz, and doing some crazy stuff... in other words the stereotype that is routinely applied to ALL cyclists.

Over the winter my father was in the mater hospital and I obviously travelled in every other day.
The number of different delivery cyclists I'd pass (in and around the Dorset St area) withough any lights or reflective gear was unreal.
I cycle during the daytime with my lights flashing (out of habit by now) - absolutely no way would I cycle without lights on a rainy winter night!

Chips Lovell

Tombo2001 wrote: »

(ii) A very high proportion of these students - compared to say cyclists that are commuting to the work place - are in the category of no helmet, no lights, no hi viz, and doing some crazy stuff... in other words the stereotype that is routinely applied to ALL cyclists.)

I don't understand. The chap was pulled in for cycling on a motorway, which is something that definitely can't be applied to "ALL cyclists". Yet you bring in all this irrelevant stuff about lights and helmets and high viz.

Tombo2001

Chips Lovell wrote: »

I don't understand. The chap was pulled in for cycling on a motorway, which is something that definitely can't be applied to "ALL cyclists". Yet you bring in all this irrelevant stuff about lights and helmets and high viz.

OK.

I thought I had set it out fairly clearly. I'll try again.

A lot of international students in Dublin are really irresponsible cyclists.

A lot of deliveroo cyclists are international students.

Cycling on the Motorway is an example of irresponsible cycling.

Another, more prominent and more frequent example of irresponsible cycling is cycling at night with zero high vis gear or lights.

You yourself rightly point out that cycling on the motorway is not typical of all cyclists.

The same point can be applied to cyclists who go out at night with zero high viz gear.

There is one group of cyclists where this type of behaviour is very common.

All cyclists get a bad name from it.

This is unfair to the majority of cyclists, who behave responsibly.

To put it differently -
I am surprised to see a cyclist on the motorway.

I am not surprised that a cyclist that is on the motorway is a deliveroo cyclist.

its just an opinion of mine, backed up by what I see.

mr spuckler

Chips Lovell wrote: »

I don't understand. The chap was pulled in for cycling on a motorway, which is something that definitely can't be applied to "ALL cyclists". Yet you bring in all this irrelevant stuff about lights and helmets and high viz.

agreed. we often read about motorists driving the wrong way down motorways, which sometimes result in serious collisions including fatalities but would never say as a result "You can see why people think motorists are headbangers when you hear of this".

motorists offend at a rate which is multiple times in excess of cyclist offences and which results in far more deaths & serious injuries yet the lazy generalisation only attaches itself to cyclists. why do you think that is?

Tombo2001 wrote: »

All cyclists get a bad name from it.

yet for some reason all motorists don't get a bad name despite motorists causing 3 fatalities a week.

Tombo2001

mr spuckler wrote: »

agreed. we often read about motorists driving the wrong way down motorways, which sometimes result in serious collisions including fatalities but would never say as a result "You can see why people think motorists are headbangers when you hear of this".

motorists offend at a rate which is multiple times in excess of cyclist offences and which results in far more deaths & serious injuries yet the lazy generalisation only attaches itself to cyclists. why do you think that is?



yet for some reason all motorists don't get a bad name despite motorists causing 3 fatalities a week.

So are you saying

There is a double standard there, and its not fair.

Or are you saying

There is no double standard there, and I am imagining things.

Chips Lovell

The logic is quite contorted.

A helmet-wearing deliveroo cyclist is stopped in broad daylight for cycling on a motorway.

Lots of deliveroo cyclists go around not wearing helmets and cycling at night without lights or high viz (lets not get into the redundancy of high viz if you have lights or the need to wear a helmet at all times).

Because lots of deliveroo cyclists go around not wearing helmets and cycling at night without lights or high viz, all cyclists seen as irresponsible.

Grassey

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Another, more prominent and more frequent example of irresponsible cycling is cycling at night with zero high vis gear

Ah really, you lost me at this..... :rolleyes:

Tombo2001

Chips Lovell wrote: »

The logic is quite contorted.

A helmet-wearing deliveroo cyclist is stopped in broad daylight for cycling on a motorway.

Lots of deliveroo cyclists go around not wearing helmets and cycling at night without lights or high viz (lets not get into the redundancy of high viz if you have lights or the need to wear a helmet at all times).

Because lots of deliveroo cyclists go around not wearing helmets and cycling at night without lights or high viz, all cyclists seen as irresponsible.

The point is very clear.

I've used detail to illustrate it.

To be honest, I've gone to some effort to illustrate it clearly the second time, as you didnt get it the first time.

Now you are arguing the detail, rather than the point, and in a condescending way.

A conversation like this goes nowhere.

So best of luck, I'll move on.

Tombo2001

Grassey wrote: »

Ah really, you lost me at this..... :rolleyes:

Yeah, i know, it never happens ever.

How do you do that emoji for throwing your eyes up to show someone said something really stupid? Its neat.

magicbastarder

getting back to cycling on the motorway, where in the hell was he delivering to? or on his way to/from?
i *think* he's heading southbound for the oscar traynor road exit, which either means he came on from the M50 junction (presumably coming from the clarehall direction), or further north?

mr spuckler

magicbastarder wrote: »

getting back to cycling on the motorway, where in the hell was he delivering to? or on his way to/from?
i *think* he's heading southbound for the oscar traynor road exit, which either means he came on from the M50 junction (presumably coming from the clarehall direction), or further north?

from Supermacs beside the Clayton hotel?

mr spuckler

Tombo2001 wrote: »

So are you saying

There is a double standard there, and its not fair.

Or are you saying

There is no double standard there, and I am imagining things.

I'm saying there's a massive double standard and hypocrisy around how all cyclists are tarred by the behaviour of a few while the same clearly doesn't apply to motorists. it's been done to death here previously.

Seth Brundle

Driver admits killing cyclist and injuring another in Co Down
Hing Tong Cheung (61) goes on trial at Newtownards Crown Court

A man has admitted killing one cyclist and seriously injuring another in a car crash in Co Down.

At Newtownards Crown Court, Hing Tong Cheung (61) from Hanover Hill denied causing the death of Gavin James Moore and grievous bodily injury to Gareth Boyle by driving dangerously on the Bangor Road in Ards on July 11th, 2017.

However, he admitted the lesser charge of causing the death and injury by careless driving.

timmyjimmy

Tombo2001 wrote: »

IN ALL FAIRNESS

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1123306639417860098

You can see why people think cyclists are headbangers when you look at this.

I (personally) have a fairly strong view that
(i) Cycling is the mode of transport of choice for international students when they come to Dublin. Deliveroo employs many from this cohort.
(ii) A very high proportion of these students - compared to say cyclists that are commuting to the work place - are in the category of no helmet, no lights, no hi viz, and doing some crazy stuff... in other words the stereotype that is routinely applied to ALL cyclists.

Also


Gas how they blacked out the Deliveroo logo :-)

The tweet says "takeaway cyclist", very specific, not branding all cyclists.

I think most of us here would think it's a no brainer to not cycle on a motorway but there's no harm in advising others to not cycle on a motorway.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with this tweet advising safe cycling and it's also not branding all cyclists.

What Username Guidelines

mr spuckler wrote: »

I'm saying there's a massive double standard and hypocrisy around how all cyclists are tarred by the behaviour of a few while the same clearly doesn't apply to motorists. it's been done to death here previously.

Yep it all boils down to an experience/empathy issue, with no clear solution.

I see so many (oh jesus so many) people driving while using their phones. But I also drive and don't use my phone. So I know not everyone does it, and therefore don't write off every car driver. 80% of cyclists drive, so can infer some empathy for motorists while on the bike (Rainy day, beaded water on wing mirror, I know it'll be harder to see me so I'll hang back, etc)

But for so many motorists, they haven't been on a bike since they were a kid. Don't understand the danger, and have no way of empathising or relating. It's easy to see it as "Them cyclists" as opposed to "some cyclists". Lots of ignorance, which is almost forgivable when compared to the hard-nosed road-ragers who feel they've a point to prove.

I read an interesting point recently, either here or on twitter, that the impression that cyclists break the rules all the time will likely never be solved, as many just simply dont know the rules of the road, or assume rules where there are none (i.e. the usuals - you have to wear a helmet, you have to cycle on the left, you have to give way to cars, etc etc).

Mickiemcfist

I'd love a coordinated "strike" of cyclists just one day where we all either drive or get the bus. Cause gridlock in Dublin & help drivers to understand that we're actually shortening their commute not hampering it. Remember the days of Luas strikes, it was mayhem & Cyclists outnumber Luas users.

magicbastarder

i think there were 13,000 cyclists crossing the canals at the last cordon count.
at an average occupancy of 1.2 per car, that's around 12,000 cars - or 60km of cars based on allowing 5m per car (which would be essentially bumper to bumper, so is a low ball estimate).

Tombo2001

timmyjimmy wrote: »

The tweet says "takeaway cyclist", very specific, not branding all cyclists.

I think most of us here would think it's a no brainer to not cycle on a motorway but there's no harm in advising others to not cycle on a motorway.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with this tweet advising safe cycling and it's also not branding all cyclists.

Why would you expect Garda Twitter to brand all cyclists. I never said it did.

The replies on the other hand.........did you same something about 'takeaway cyclists'......because so many of the replies only picked up on 'cyclist'.

Replying to @GardaTraffic
Is the n7 a motorway ? Usually two or three steamers cycling ��*♀️ not as much as a bell on there bike

Replying to @GardaTraffic
You need to fine cyclists more. If i break a red light its 3pts and 80 fine possible court appearence. Cyclists get away with doing it all the time especially in City centre when trying to cross when i have pesdestrian light.

Replying to @GardaTraffic
Cyclists to obey rules ha ha

Replying to @GardaTraffic
Ha ha, typical of all cyclists, no rules must be obeyed......ever.

Replying to @GardaTraffic
What was cyclist punishment ?

Replying to @GardaTraffic
#cyclists must of thought that was a lovely cycle lane

timmyjimmy

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Why would you expect Garda Twitter to brand all cyclists. I never said it did.

The replies on the other hand.........did you same something about 'takeaway cyclists'......because so many of the replies only picked up on 'cyclist'.

Replying to @GardaTraffic
Is the n7 a motorway ? Usually two or three steamers cycling ��*♀️ not as much as a bell on there bike

Replying to @GardaTraffic
You need to fine cyclists more. If i break a red light its 3pts and 80 fine possible court appearence. Cyclists get away with doing it all the time especially in City centre when trying to cross when i have pesdestrian light.

Replying to @GardaTraffic
Cyclists to obey rules ha ha

Replying to @GardaTraffic
Ha ha, typical of all cyclists, no rules must be obeyed......ever.

Replying to @GardaTraffic
What was cyclist punishment ?

Replying to @GardaTraffic
#cyclists must of thought that was a lovely cycle lane

First you were on about the tweet, now you're on about the replies, make up your mind?
As said, there's nothing wrong with the tweet. Let's hope that the message gets out to some people. Some lads get so worked up when they see the word cyclist. No wonder the self righteous cyclist image exists.

Rechuchote

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6979575/Woman-21-sent-text-message-driving-ran-killed-champion-cyclist.html

Woman, 21, allegedly 'sent a text message while driving 68 seconds before she ran over and killed a champion cyclist'
A court heard Billie Rodda sent a text message 68 seconds before the fatal crash
She allegedly sent seven messages and received 10 during a half-hour drive
Ms Rodda told police she was looking at her car's speedometer moments before
Prosecutors say she was 'inattentive' throughout her drive on the day
By ALANA MAZZONI FOR DAILY MAIL AUSTRALIA

PUBLISHED: 09:42, 1 May 2019

Jason Lowndes, 23, was cycling along Sedgwick Road near Bendigo on December 22, 2017, when he was struck by a vehicle.

This week, the County Court heard Billie Rodda sent seven messages to her boyfriend during the half-hour drive before she hit Mr Lowndes, the Sydney Morning Herald reported.

The emerging Australian cycling star was flown to hospital but died later that day.

Ms Rodda will stand trial this year facing a charge of dangerous driving causing death.

The last text message was sent just 68 seconds before the fatal collision.

Defence Rahmin de Kretser said Ms Rodda told police she wasn't looking at her phone at the time of the crash, but actually had her eyes on the cars speedometer moments before.

The court heard she was distracted for between two and four seconds before impact.

Prosecutor Georgina Coghlan said this was 'a short period of inattention,' the Sydney Morning Herald reported.

However, prosecutors said they do not believe Ms Rodda's claim that she was looking at her car's speedometer.

She said that based on the amount of text messages she sent and received, she was 'inattentive' throughout her car trip.

'We are not talking about yes and no messages here, some were lengthy messages,' the prosecutor said.

Despite her distraction, Ms Rodda was actually travelling under the speed limit on the day.

Police believe she drove between 80 and 90 kilometres an hour while in an 100 kilometre an hour zone.

The court heard Mr Lowndes could have been around 1.5 metres to the side of the edge of the road when Ms Rodda's car hit him.

The victim was wearing dark cycling gear at the time, and could have also had headphones in - possibly diminishing his hearing.

Ms Coghlan told the court that Ms Rodda drove along Sedgwick Road six days a week, and would have known cyclists frequently used the road.

A trial will be held later this year.

Hurrache

Another shameful court result
http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/irish-cyclist-paralysed-mark-millar/

Grassey

Rechuchote wrote: »

The victim was wearing dark cycling gear at the time, and could have also had headphones in - possibly diminishing his hearing.

This annoys me so ********* much!!!

Comments on his attire are irrelevant - It was 10:15am in the middle of their summer.
Likewise whether he had/hadn't earphones would make zero impact to the fact that he was hit by a driver texting. All it does is dog-whistle the whole "sure he probably/maybe was doing something slightly questionable there, better question his character to let the driver off with a slap on the wrist, sure how could she have avoided him if he'd earphones in and not heard her coming..."