I haven't really read the entire thread, but from the OP..
So, Im driving along a country lane near home, its wide enough for two cars to pass but not two cars and a bike.
So if you can't overtake them two a breast, you can't overtake them single file. In fact, if they went single file it would be even harder to overtake, as they'd be longer.
Sounds like they were a bit nobbish when you talked to them though, but maybe you came across as a bit silly or something.
Nothing wrong with riding two a breast.
Has anyone checked to see if the stretch of road concerned is a Strava seg? 😉
in the middle of my side of the road... Sadly this is often interpreted as selfish cycling...
Driver education is what is needed here so they can understand why we ride defensively and to respect our desire to stay alive
100% agree with this.
It's all very well teaching cyclists to claim the lane, but someone needs to teach the drivers and explain that [url= http://www.citycycling.co.uk/Issue8/Purpose.html ]yes we are doing it on purpose[/url], but not to annoy them.
I'd love to see British Cycling/CTC/Sustrans/RoadPeace etc get together and fund a newspaper/TV campaign about this (and other myths/misconceptions like riding two-abreast and the dreaded "road tax")
+1 crazy legs
In fact you've just reminded me of a car v bike incident I had earlier in the year.
I was out photographing a running event and driving towards a [url= https://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=51.113916,-0.486746&spn=0.002411,0.008755&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=51.113914,-0.488779&panoid=OXFltaeR1o-XtmHsXI_OZA&cbp=11,81.84,,0,0 ]T junction of a country lane with high hedges[/url].
I was in no hurry and as I approached the junction to turn right, two sportive riders swept in from my left, completely cutting the corner.
Had I literally been 2 seconds earlier they would have gone straight over my bonnet. Fortunately they didn't but that didn't stop the woman on the back mouthing off at me as if their piss poor road skills were my fault.
Twasn't worth chasing after them because they would have reacted in the same fashion as the OP's encounter.
Except that riding two abreast is entirely legal whereas jumping red lights and riding on the pavement isn't??
It's on the highway code as a 'you should never' so you can get pulled by a bored copper and it [url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/stw-cyclist-disagrees-with-police-shocker-two-abreast-not-allowed ]has been done[/url]
I really hope Taff is a troll.
[img]
[/img]I don't really have the hair for it
What exactly is wrong with riding two abreast if the road is not wide enough for two cars plus a bike? If a safe overtake is already going to involve the car using the other carriageway, then what's the problem with riding two abreast?
I think it has its place in certain locations. In areas of solid white lines I think it prevents people from doing stupid overtakes which I see fairly often on some of my local roads. You don't have to overtake on the opposite side of the road giving a metre/metre and half of clearance is aduaqate in the majority of locations and this helps for visibility if here are small bends in the road.
Riding two abreast isn't as much of an issue to me if it's a small group as overtaking is just as easy as a car but in the likes of large group or sportive etc it does prevent safe overtaking unless the straight section of road is long enough same as overtaking a lorry although a lot slower. It's more politeness towards other road users with a bit of impatience thrown in.
EDIT: apologies if I sounded harsh before.. bad day at work
It's on the highway code as a 'you should never' so you can get pulled by a bored copper
Err.. wrong on two counts:
"Never" in the Highway Code is not the legally enforceable bits. The bits backed by road traffic law are MUST or MUST NOT in bold.
And it doesn't say [i]"never ride two abreast"[/i], it says [i]"never ride [u]more[/u] than two abreast"[/i]
It also [u]advises[/u] (but doesn't enforce) that we should [i]"ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends"[/i]
So the Op was on his way to the mountain bike playground in his car and was held up en route - big deal.
Id suggest the OP should have just carried on when they pulled in and not thought any more of the matter, to follow them in to the petrol station to give his two penneth, was so unbelievably childish and pathetic, to then come on a forum for a group hug - shows a very "mountain biker" attitude to life.
(ie insecure middle aged male who is frustrated at the world)
where i live it is literally crawling with big groups of roadies..mostly fat and clad in lycra tbh most of them do ride like a bunch of prats, they think they own the road and they are mostly arrogant...they dont do themselves any favours at all..get those bombers out.
strange thought they had closed roads off for the olympic road race
As I and a couple of others have posted but not got a response from the OP - what exactly did you want the cyclists to do? By your own admission the road was only wide enough for 2 cars not 2 cars and a bike so wtf difference does it make if they were two abreast? It would have only made things harder for you to overtake (if an opportunity to do so safely arose) as the line would have been longer.
Two abreast on a narrow lane where you can't overtake without going dangerously close to the outside cyclist (regardless of oncoming traffic) is the only time cyclists should make an effort to change to single file so you can at least attempt to pass (although as in my previous post it's often instinctive to pull left if an oncoming car appears rather than just brake so you'd end up going into the line of cyclists).
The only other thing they could have done was stop and pull over for you, that's a reasonable expectation for an HGV or on a really quiet lane but not for a single car on a road with regular traffic as otherwise you're asking them to ruin their ride.
Well here we are.........5 pages of disagreement, some fairly ill-natured, on a cycling forum.
Can we really complain when a large number of motorists and the general public look down upon cyclists in general, when quite evidently various factions of cycling do exactly the same thing.
Utterly bloody pathetic 👿
They probably ride like they are entitled to use the whole carriageway and you are obliged to give them room, you could always be a c@nt and clip them with your wing mirror like a woman did to me, smashing me to the floor in front of the following traffic. But then that is what you get with mountain bikers in their cars thinking they have an entitlement to the road and that all other road users are obliged to get out of their way.
Get a life you people, cyclists on the road is something you need to get used to.
What grhams S to taff re the Highway code from your own link ...to prove the point
You should wear
a cycle helmet which conforms to current regulations, is the correct size and securely fastened
appropriate clothes for cycling. Avoid clothes which may get tangled in the chain, or in a wheel or may obscure your lights
light-coloured or fluorescent clothing which helps other road users to see you in daylight and poor light
reflective clothing and/or accessories (belt, arm or ankle bands) in the dark
I dont think you get done for ignoring any of those that you [b] should[/b] do any more than the should re two abreast. As noted it says not more than two abreast rather than saying you cannot ride two abreast
no need to clip em with your mirror, they are probably all going to die prematurely due to all those traffic fumes they are inhaling..
It's probably already been said, but even on my own I would ride with enough space to my left for another cyclist. I will move further in if I decide it is safe, and it usually is. But it is 100% my decision - the only thing at stake is [u]my[/u] safety (well, and a few seconds' inconvenience for the driver).
I'm a 2nd cat on the road and an elite level xc racer the latter being my true love anyway yes I can say 99% of roadies are cocks....just saying like
I pull in and without loosing my rag and politely question them, asking why they never let me pass (I had cycle gear on too as I was on my way to a ride). To say they where arrogant and non-caring would be an understatement, not one of them came up with a reason as to why they never let me pass.
The OP made the mistake of not being clear when he said that 'if' they had cycled in single file then he 'may' have been able to get past safely and in true STW stylee he was taken absolutely at his word, whereas he should have given a yard by yard account detailing the exact position of each member of the group, road width along the entire route together with any areas of 'special interest' eg. lay-by's, bus stops etc etc.
None of that really matters of course, as he was left fuming by a bunch of tossers, one of whom told him to **** off when asked a perfectly reasonable question. Probably tells me all I need to know re the cyclists 🙄
XCneil, I take it you are in that 99%
as you have given yourself very good odds for being in that group.
Woody, none need give a reason as to why they didnt let him pass, they are not required to let him pass.
don't you get it, when in a car you are not the number one honcho on the road, you must allow for slower road users and show consideration, like horses, learner drivers etc.
since being knocked off anyone that gives me shit for riding my bike on the road will get knocked out, I am so ****ing tired of motorists and their ****ing attitude to cyclists.
bring it on any time.
xcneil - wish I was like you, just saying like. 🙄
Apart from not telling him to f off, in what way could they have not been "tossers"?None of that really matters of course, as he was left fuming by a bunch of tossers, one of whom told him to **** off when asked a perfectly reasonable question. Probably tells me all I need to know re the cyclists
The road was not wide enough. What should they do - invite the car in: "yea - come by, it's well worth the risk."?
The OP [b]was[/b] very cautious and considerate but I think it's you who needs help with some 'issues' there sancho.
I find having a girlfriend helps 😉
How about if they had given him an answer to his question?Apart from not telling him to f off, in what way could they have not been "tossers"?
Yes. That may have helped.
specialknees - Member''If there is a spot, they got to a garage and pulled in''.
They passed at least three other places they could have done the same.
Perhaps they felt too embarassed.
The OP was very cautious and considerate but I think it's you who needs help with some 'issues' there sancho.
He was considerate until he followed them into a petrol station for a rant.
I can see sanchos point, most of the people on here would change their tone if it was a bunch of fat overweight IT managers on Orange 5's blocking the road instead of roadies.
I pull in and without loosing my rag and politely question them....
Maybe the OP would care say exactly how he worded his polite questions which have miraculously been transformed into a rant in the space of 6 pages?
As a supposed cyclist, he should already know the obvious answer, but I do agree that it would be better to answer him nicely.How about if they had given him an answer to his question?
Two separate things:
1. how they were riding (nothing wrong)
2. how they behaved after (rude)
The second one doesn't mean they were wrong in the first one.
As a supposed cyclist, he should already know the obvious answer
Quite possibly but from the differing responses on here it is fairly obvious that there are different schools of thought, even amongst regular road cyclists.
I'm not reading all that but I do hope it's mostly discussion about the mispelling of 'roadies' in the thread title?
How about if they had given him an answer to his question?
You must have cycled on the road to know that when people shout amongst other things
- why don't you pay road tax?
- why don't you use the cycle lane?
- why do cyclist cycle in the middle of the road?
etc.. they almost always have no interest in the answer, they just want you out of their way.
.. so in the same way that the OP has incorrectly assumed they were cycling in that way purely because they were arrogant, they must have incorrectly assumed he was stopping his car and coming over to talk to them purely because he impatient and aggressive.
Maybe the problem is that cyclists like these are seen to be enjoying themselves on the road.... not sure anybody else does?
They are using a public space for thier private past time. But, as such, they are including other members of the public into their little game.... thing is, other members of the public don't wanna be play... for them the road is a tool to get from A to B and not a playground.
Ro5ey
The road is a place for vehicles other than cars
**** off with this cyclists on the road need to get out of your way crap.
the cyclists appear to have been cycling in a group down a country lane, they dont have to give up the road to a car.
and if those cyclists are getting from a to b then you have to sit behind them and wait.
just like you do for horses, learners, tractors etc.
Try riding on the road and see what its like Ive been spat at, stuff thrown at me, knocked off, run in to run over, hit, abused, horns etc etc.
And for what minding my own business riding a bike on the road.
Learn to share the road you car driving ****s.
I struggle with long sentences, but from the first page...
If ten riders got into single file wouldn't that just leave you with a very long line to try to get past safely? Or would you just start to pass and then push into the middle of them if something was coming the other way?
Having been educated on the motorbike thread, I believe the correct action would indeed be to push yourself in between two of the cyclists, you would clearly then have to argue about safe gaps and braking distances to justify your beheviour. Here is the warning though, never and I mean never even hint at the fact that you might be wrong or that this could be considered a dangerous manouvre. You are in control of the car and if the cyclists can't deal with it then they should not be on the road if they're simply going to prevent you making progress. Inconsiderate idiots.
Sancho .... chillout, dude.
Maybe step away from the keyboard for a moment
You have super over-reacted to my post as you know nothing of my road use.
Would like to apologise, so that you can be taken seriously
Skills and consideration could certainly be improved on all sides.
Riding 'through and off' is, and has been, standard group riding procedure for decades. And I mean decades. Since early 1900's if not earlier. It's effective for riding efficiently against the wind.
Are we saying that cycling practice which takes place for good reasons and has done so for c 50-60 years before cars came into mass ownership, has to change now because car drivers (and I am one) don't like it?
Not sure I can see a good rationale for that.
And if the French, Italians, Spanish, Dutch, Danish can STILL manage to respect cyclists, why can't Brits?
Just get a beat up Land Rover they soon get out off the way.
They are using a public space for thier private past time. But, as such, they are including other members of the public into their little game....
I see.
So should we ban all private past times in public spaces?? Not all of us have our own lands and private estates to occupy us.
Or are you just suggesting that the law is changed to force people enjoying themselves to give way to miserable people?
the cyclists appear to have been cycling in a group down a country lane, they dont have to give up the road to a car
On another forum, there's a bloke in red socks explaining how he and the rest of his rambling group has the right to walk down the middle of a bridleway, and they don't have to move to let those lycra louts get past.
Try riding on the road and see what its like Ive been spat at, stuff thrown at me, knocked off, run in to run over, hit, abused, horns etc etc.
And for what minding my own business riding a bike on the road.
Me too, cycled to work every day for the past 25 years.
And in that time, I've noticed that the proportion of idiots on bikes is roughly the same as that in cars.
169Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a large or slow-moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass.
Is it ok to hold up single cars?
[i]On another forum, there's a bloke in red socks explaining how he and the rest of his rambling group has the right to walk down the middle of a bridleway, and they don't have to move to let those lycra louts get past. [/i]
and they don't so what's your point ?
The difference is that the "lycra louts" are unlikely to suddenly meet another cyclist coming the other direction, run out of room, swerve into the rambling group and kill half of them.
And if the French, Italians, Spanish, Dutch, Danish can STILL manage to respect cyclists, why can't Brits?
Are you sure that the Spanish respect cyclists?
let's do some maths children.....
4 miles behind the Peloton which may have been averaging 20mph?
= 12 minutes sat behind the spandex massif??
With patience like that they should have pulled you over and given you a Nobel Peace Prize, anyone else with a pulse would have either driven over the top of them or forced their way by and [i]made[/i] them single file.
Either way, keep hugging those trees dear pacifist 😆
Graham … ever played a game of cricket in the local shopping centre? Maybe a game of football in the library?
Sorry but that’s how a lot of drivers see it.
I’ve been out with road groups didn’t like it for this very reason… yes we have the “right” to be there… but arrogance I witnessed on those rides and on here this afternoon,I could do without.
Because those who don’t wanna play our little game just happen to be in charge of 1+ ton of metal... (thanks for illustrating the point, with your last post)
Be careful guys… remember what Mum said…. Don’t play in the road.
Threads like this are great for giving an insight into why things like the Good Friday Agreement took so long to be written.
Graham … ever played a game of cricket in the local shopping centre? Maybe a game of football in the library?
I've played cricket and football in the park. The park is a public space.
Graham … ever played a game of cricket in the local shopping centre? Maybe a game of football in the library?
No, but I've played football in the road. I've seen people walking and jogging in the road. I've seen horses on the road.
I've even seen drivers who looked like they were enjoying themselves.
Because those who don’t wanna play our little game just happen to be in charge on 1+ ton of metal... (thanks for illustrating the point, with your last post)
Ahh.. "might is right". Tell me, should cars be forced to pull over and get out the way of HGVs at weekends?
I mean, the cars are probably out for leisure reasons. The HGVs are working. They don't want to play and they are bigger, heavier, will come off a lot better in a crash AND they pay more "road tax".
Sure the cars have a right to be there, but the HGVS happen to be in charge of 12 tons of metal.
I cant believe the comments on this a cycling thread about other cyclists being on the road.
perhaps some people need to undersatnd they are not so important when in their car and that the road is a shared space.
If you dont like getting stuck behind cyclists, or a slow moving vehicle, then think about the other road users and how they might feel rather than getting all hot and bothered about being held up.
Ransos... You're missing the point old chap.. Everyone else in the park were also there, enjoying themselves.
Take your football match on the alloments next door... you'd getta hoe up your Harris.
Sancho - Member
I cant believe the comments on this a cycling thread about other cyclists being on the road.
+1
Am surprised and saddened to read so much antagonism towards cyclists on the road. Am also somewhat bemused as to why so many people get so angry about having to slow down a little, for whatever reason.
Like many of you, I'm a road cyclist, mountain biker, car driver, and hiker - and generally think the majority of folks in all 'groups' are on the whole decent and considerate.
In this specific example, I suspect there might be many, justifiable reasons why a group of road cyclists acted the way they did. When I'm out riding with a group, we are often wary of going single file as it leads to drivers trying to squeeze past when there isn't enough room. Spliting into 2 groups isn't usually practical or safe to have a car in the middle. And often stopping a group in a layby etc us pretty hard as there is limited room and it's often not possible to spot such opportunities in time to communicate it through the group in time to allow everyone to safely stop.
Why the impatience? Does a few minutes really matter? Personally, I can happily sit behind a group of cyclists and admire some very fit legs 🙂 If I'm on my bike (road or off-road) I have no problem slowing down for ramblers or dog walkers that are often using the back roads round here. And let's just appreciate the fact that hopefully most road users will get home safe and sound to their family and friends.
Graham.. did you carry on your game of footie in the street when a car came?
Ro5ey
we all get you don't like roadies, so stop talking sh!te.
perhaps some people need to undersatnd they are not so important when in [s]their car[/s] a large'ish cycling group and that the road is a shared space.
Goes both ways, doesn't it.........common courtesy that is !
Pigeon Holed me there nicely Sancho. 🙄
So.. both sides have had their say.
I have read the lot and although I now know a bit more about road riding than I did, I feel I have learnt more aboute the human race in general.
All I really wanted was consideration, I wasnt rude, I didnt loose my rag or raise my voice, I kept a safe distance and never tried any silly Manoeuvres. I aproached the group in a friendly manner but was virtually ignored, those that did engage in CONVERSATION told me tuff S%it in so many words, followed by rudery, Shame on them.
I just hope when people see me or you with cycle kit on they dont jump to any conclusions and assume we are all like that.
Life goes on...
Amen to that.
Just pick a different route at weekends!
Graham.. did you carry on your game of footie in the street when a car came?
Nice swerving of my question. No I didn't. But in the heady days of my youth, when such games were played, cars would drive slowly through streets because they'd [i]expect[/i] kids to be playing in them.
Now, answer my questions, HGVs...
woody, you miss the point.
the faster car is slowed down, so has to share the space,
when a fast group of cyclists catch a slower walking horse they have to slow down and pass when safe and so on and so on, its about sharing the road, and you dont have to get out of the way to let someone past.
just learn that lesson please then we will all be safer.
I've been cycling on the road for about 15 years, but only started driving very recently.
I often feel incredibly vulnerable cycling on the road.
Now that I'm driving, I can understand why some drivers become frustrated/impatient with cyclists, not because their very very important journey is being delayed but because it can be quite unnerving trying to pass (particularly a large group). That said, I'm putting my own nerves down to concern my actions could have for the cyclist(s) and therefore added pressure to pass safely, along with a lack of experience.
Whilst the only correct answer must always be that the driver should stay behind patiently until it's safe to pass, I now know as a cyclist that maybe the driver behind me isn't a total c0ck, but just a bit worried/hesitant about passing, and I'll try to make allowances accordingly (I would often ride with a mindset that as the vulnerable road user, the car should always be the one making the allowances).
Nice to see it from both sides finally.
That said, sitting behind anything is just something I gather you have to get used to 🙂 Singletrack roads on Skye are good for patience!
Ro5ey
we all get you don't like roadies, so stop talking sh!te.
Nah... I just dont like blind arrogance in any form, from any one... be they a fellow cyclist or not.
You can think I'm talking sh!te all you like... just please be careful and dont pick a fight with a car.
Not all motorists will be as considerate as the OP.
specialknees id suggest you get on with your life and ignore most of what is said here and what was said to you by the other cyclists, that way you wont end up fuming on the forum like me.
Ransos... You're missing the point old chap.. Everyone else in the park were also there, enjoying themselves.
You were claiming that road cyclists shouldn't use a public space for private recreation.
I don't recall any law that requires the sole function of road use to be utility, any more than park use is the sole preserve of dog walkers.
Roadie behaviour like that is no different to walkers who don't get out of the way.
Both are being rude.
Why the impatience? Does a few minutes really matter?
Quite. You'd imagine there are an awful lot of houses on fire judging by the way cars Must Get Past At All Costs.
''that way you wont end up fuming on the forum like me''
Good point Sancho.
Im calm now.Im in a calm place now.
As I said I have learnt a bit today.
Sadly, if it were someone else in my shoes (well car) it could have been a very different outcome.
Im going to pat myself on the back and get on with my life.
Might even ride me bike tonight.
Look out for me.!
Zippy
Walkers are not being rude by not getting out of your way FFS
who do you think you are.
I don't recall any law that requires the sole function of road use to be utility
So what is utility, i object to the school run, they can walk to school. As for commuters that is what buses and trains are for. Driving to the shops, well that isn't very helpful is it.
Goods should be on railways, isn't that the cry.
So that is road congestion solved.
just learn that lesson please then we will all be safer.
You're preaching to the converted here sancho.
If you read my posts I am advocating courtesy from all sides and just because you don't [b]have[/b] to get out of the way, doesn't mean that you don't!
Re the 'walkers', if I'm walking and I see a bike coming towards me, I'll usually get out of the way, especially if I'm walking the dogs. I don't have to but it's often a lot easier for me to do that. No big deal and it usually ends in a mutual smile and thanks. The 30-40% of mtb'ers who don't even acknowledge you or bother to say thanks despite the fact I have ROW can go **** themselves however 😆
Woody +1
Roadie behaviour like that is no different to walkers who don't get out of the way.
I think you need to read the law regarding cycling access to the countryside. You have no rights, cyclists are expected by law to get out of the way of walkers, horses, etc.
Walkers may give way to you but they have no duty to do so, but as a cyclist you are expected to yield the path without question. The usual crap about the path not being used, it being ok to build jumps, everyone should get out of my way because i am important, is just that, CRAP.
The number of times i read and experience people on bikes riding downhill refusing to yield to those riding up hill regardless of the climb pretty well sums up why i find most mtb riders a bunch of ********.
If mtbers want to ride off road there are some very simple rules to abide by, if you don't like them, talk to the landowner, they can change the rules in specific cases. There is rarely any issue with cheeky trials as long as you remember your not meant to be there and act accordingly.
Re the 'walkers', if I'm walking and I see a bike coming towards me, I'll usually get out of the way. I don't have to but it's often a lot easier for me to do that. No big deal and it usually ends in a mutual smile and thanks.
I do the same, but it's not really a valid comparison, as moving to the side of the path is very easy to do. In the OP's case, the cycling group would have to find a large space to pull over, and organise themselves so it could be done safely. Not very easy or convenient. On the other hand, the driver could spend a couple of minutes longer on his journey...
Walkers are not being rude by not getting out of your way FFS
who do you think you are.
Just to double check your tolerance levels - you roll up behind a bunch of walkers on a bridleway on your mtb, they turn and see you there then carry on plodding along as they were. You get off and walk too or do a bit of track standing and slow rolling.
1min gone - happy still?
3mins gone - still happy?
6mins gone - not getting a little tetchy yet?
12mins gone - how are those trees and birds looking - still chipper?
20mins gone - all sweetness and light with you?
Well that's the length of time the op was slowed.
The point is in both cases the walker and cyclist are probably in the right in the strictest sense of the word by some book or other but they have failed the test of being a considerate human being and stepped over the line of being reasonable in sticking to "their rights". Give and take is what makes the world go around.
Once more the conversation has drifted into the wrong assumption that the cyclists simply chose not to move on a [i]whim[/i].
A walker can just move without endangering themselves - a rider on a road could very well make the situation much more risky for themselves by inviting a car to come through in a dangerous place. If you can't see the on-coming road, it isn't safe to overtake.
The comparison is false.
[u]Totally[/u] wrong - because the walkers would risk nothing by moving aside.Just to double check your tolerance levels - you roll up behind a bunch of walkers on a bridleway on your mtb, they turn and see you there then carry on plodding along as they were. You get off and walk too or do a bit of track standing and slow rolling.1min gone - happy still?
3mins gone - still happy?
6mins gone - not getting a little tetchy yet?
12mins gone - how are those trees and birds looking - still chipper?
20mins gone - all sweetness and light with you?Well that's the length of time the op was slowed.
The point is in both cases the walker and cyclist are probably in the right in the strictest sense of the word by some book or other but they have failed the test of being a considerate human being and stepped over the line of being reasonable in sticking to "their rights". Give and take is what makes the world go around.
"You were claiming that road cyclists shouldn't use a public space for private recreation."
No not really... the point I was making was
Others road users do not want to be playing our cycling for fun, game.
Once more the conversation has drifted into the wrong assumption that the cyclists simply chose not to move on a whim.A walker can just move without endangering themselves - a rider on a road could very well make the situation much more risky for themselves by inviting a car to come through in a dangerous place. If you can't see the on-coming road, it isn't safe to overtake.
The comparison is false.
You see this is where internet bickering is rubbish - what you have said there could be perfectly reasonable or complete bollox - you don't know as you were not there and don't know the road and neither do I. Facts remain that I'm struggling to imagine a 4 mile bit of quiet back road without a layby, little road junction or some such which a group could not roll through to let other traffic through if it chose. I don't buy the its hard to do that as a group nonsense - I've done more group ride miles than had hot dinners and if that is the case the group should be having a word with itself about comms and groups leadership.
I would suggest the cyclists were risking far more, as not all drivers are as patient and courteous as the OP.Totally wrong - because the walkers would risk nothing by moving aside.
Totally wrong - because the walkers would risk nothing by moving aside.
See my last post - it is ok to pull over and stop when in a group - you are not in the tdf! I have done it with groups thousands of times. Not one of those times was I risking anything (except a strava time!).
I wouldn't want to be stopping all the time like that but road where this is a problem to this extreme are quite unusual so a bit of consideration in those situations would seem reasonable - you hold up others for just a few minutes and you have to stops a few times for a couple of seconds - both parties inconvenienced but not significantly. Seems fair.
No not really... the point I was making wasOthers road users do not want to be playing our cycling for fun, game.
Well if it's "no not really" then why say it?
The point about public spaces is that we have to share them. There is no particular reason why a motorist should take priority over a recreational cyclist.