This is a tough one, it's public land and apart from a few signs little to guide people on the protocol surrounding the tracks so you should in theory always be aware that there are possibly people on the track round the corner.
Looking at it in another light that could have been an injured rider who had just come off badly that was ploughed in to.
In another light it is a DH track and should be enjoyed as such. Maybe the FC need to add better signage and barriers to help with the issue.
Having just watched the video (and following the thread all day) is it just me or does the pushup track actually merge with the trail there? Looks to come in from the right just in front of the rider then separate off to the right a yard or two before the impact.
The guy is stationary in much the same way i might be if i was thinking "hmmmm is this the right track" though admittedly I'd be off the track (at a trail centre) or staring over a precipice trying to tally it with a hashed green line on my map
OK so the guy pushing up is an idiot if indeed he is walking up a DH trail, but that doesn't mean the guy descending isn't an utter douche as well.
Some corkers here
https://nsmb.com/articles/50-ways-to-leave-your-bicycle/
The save on this one is immense, he was unlucky that the kid ran into his escape route, at the last minute he tips the front wheel to the side and down low to avoid literally running the kid over then flips the bike over the kid after the initial impact to stop him from getting caught up in the bike.
Not a tear from the poor lad either!
How do you stop there if someone decides to have a family picnic at the bottom of the drop?
it really depends on the spread. I don't brake for Hummus.
What if it had been a kid?
I came across a couple walking their dog up Yoghurt Pots by Peaslake on Sunday afternoon. They'd obviously heard me coming as they'd carefully walked off the trail and were holding their dog so it didn't run out at me. I was torn between 'why are you here? Many berms and clearly not designed for walking' and 'thanks very much'.
This all came out as an 'oh, hello' as I sped past.
Good thing I had a good sight line when I encountered this last year in Morzine.
She's what the French refer to as "les incompetente"...
I almost took out a guy and his son at the bottom of the Off beat Wall at Ft Bill about 8years ago - who would've been in the wrong had I mowed them down at 35mph? No excuses, the lad shouldn't have been pushing his bike up the track.
sirromj Goat fail. That's a Soay Sheep (possibly) and they're hard little bastards.
Dedicated and signposted downhill track?
If so pusher not being very clever. I'll assume that there is a no entry sign at the bottom. If not then wrong to assume that all know the correct format and way of doing things. If not signposted then even a dimwit should know that you always ride at a speed where you can stop.
In fact even on a dedicated downhill you ride at a speed you can stop. Your personal enjoyment is always secondary. Would the OP and his supporters have ben offended if that was a casualty lying in the track? Even by the selfish standards prevalent on this forum I seriously doubt it but it appears that many feel its ok to ride out of control. Morons. Selfish ones at that.
"Maybe the FC need to add better signage and barriers to help with the issue. "
Maybe the riders need to take some responsibility and maybe the FC need to stop screwing the woods up with signposts.
matt that troll's been done already
And not even a good troll really.
legend -
matt that troll's been done already
Pretty sure everything that was said yesterday is being done again.
(Notice on the Kid Vs Downhill mountain biker video, kid's mum uses the immortal word - "Sorry". And the mtber doesn't call her or her kid any demeaning names. And I thought Ozzies were supposed to be the brash and uncouth ones.)
Some people seem to be confused by what a downhill track is and how it should be ridden versus a pootle around their local woods.
Some people seem to be confused by what a downhill track is and how it should be ridden versus a pootle around their local woods.
Both are to be ridden at full gnar-max, surely.
Would the OP and his supporters have ben offended if that was a casualty lying in the track?
A good point well made - if someone had stacked it and been immobile on the track the rider couldn't have stopped.
Would the OP and his supporters have ben offended if that was a casualty lying in the track?
Assuming the casualty was someone riding the DH and stacked it...well that goes with the territory does it not? Everyone riding a DH track knows this, knows the risk and will make a pretty massive self peservatory effort to get off the line ASAP.
Again, this is not a canal towpath or nice bridleway here - different rules and risk factors apply. If you don't like them, there are thousands of miles of other off road paths to play on.
However...I've never been there and have no idea of signage for either unaware riders new to the area or walkers.Riding flat out in an area where the intended purpose is not explicit for the unaware might be pretty daft.
Exactly what convert says, all of it. And it wasn't a casualty, it was a buffoon.
Yeah but it could've been an injured baby robin
a buffobin?
I once bunnyhopped a snake. Just sunning itself in the middle of the trail it was. I went back to have a better look at it but it had scarpered. Looked like an adder.
Jamesfts, I am confused. Perhaps you could provide us with the agreed legal definition of a 'DH track' and reference the legislation where places with this designation absolve its users from taking any personal responsibility for their actions?
As you like car analogies I've got a pertinent one: If you drive your car around a blind bend at a speed that makes you unable to stop for a pedestrian crossing the road who's to blame? The same applies to bikes.
I'm not sure a defence of 'it was his fault for walking where he was legally entitled to do so' will get you very far.
Perhaps a solution to this conundrum is sight lines and feature placement should be carefully thought about. Just an idea.
If you drive your car around a blind bend at a speed that makes you unable to stop for a pedestrian crossing the road who's to blame?
I'm going for pedestrian for not checking the road was clear
If it was a race, they'd have marshals at unsighted points of the track to slow riders if there was a casualty.
No race, no marshals, you've got to ride differently.
unless i missed it,
Was the OP or the other guy hurt? Amazed you got up so quick, but i guess adrenalin was pumping so you only felt it in the morning. Seems like you were going quick (clearly capable rider) perhaps the other rider thought it was a simple single track or new to the area? How did the conversation go with the other rider when you checked you were both in one piece?
and more importantly how were the bikes 😉
I blame gravity.
Damn you nedrapier, for finding something not mentioned in the previous 3 pages!! (Marshals) (I'm not checking)
I'm going for pedestrian for not checking the road was clear
I'm surprised its not the baby robins fault - along with poverty, war, and Theresa May.
Pretty scary crash. There's a load of signs around Stile Cop warning you about the potential for injury. I can't remember if there are any that specifically mention pushing routes, but it's kinda given really.
One thing to note though: if the person coming up was (say) a walker not a fellow biker and they decided to get all legal against the downhill biker, I would not like to stand up in court to defend them. I reckon they might have an expensive time of it :-/
Hopefully, being a fellow biker, some high words were said, cuts and bruises compared and they both went riding again, but it's well worth remembering that unless you're on a closed track, anything can happen round the next corner and you need to be ready for it.
Damn you nedrapier, for finding something not mentioned in the previous 3 pages!! (Marshals) (I'm not checking)
I didn't! 😀
More luck than judgement, which is how the guys in the vid escaped serious injury - eh?! 😀
If it was a race, they'd have marshals at unsighted points of the track to slow riders if there was a casualty.No race, no marshals, you've got to ride differently.
If during a race he had hit a spectator walking across the track who's fault
is that?
Would the OP and his supporters have been offended if that was a casualty lying in the track?
Surely by your own logic it is the fault of the crashed rider for going to fast and crashing in the first place
Depends if the pedestrian ignored the tape / marshals or not I guess. If insufficiently taped / marshalled I guess it would be the organiser or BC for signing off the track inappropriately?
Sadly, the key thing is in a race the organiser will have Public liability so if a pedestrian is injured badly can be compensated
Surely by your own logic it is the fault of the crashed rider for going to fast and crashing in the first place
It would be his fault for crashing, but not his fault if then another rider ran into him because he was travelling too fast to stop.
That said - it's becoming an increasing number of variables; for example when i've been on a ride when someone has crashed (badly) then we've immediately posted a sentry back up the track to prevent someone running into him and worsening the situation. If the downed rider's mates hadn't done that then they'd carry some of the blame for an ensuing crash; if another rider flew past them shouting strava (or missed the warning because they were listening to music on their headphones 😉 ) then it'd be their fault.
But like I said; whose 'fault' it is is not particularly what concerns me in these situations, I try to avoid getting into these situations full stop because the concept of suffering a major injury, or causing a major injury to someone else - the consequences of that are not substantially diminished by sitting in my wheelchair thinking 'but I was in the right!' Maybe I'm risk averse to that extent, YMMV.
Surely by your own logic it is the fault of the crashed rider for going to fast and crashing in the first place
Damn, that's good.
Jamesfts, I am confused.
Yup, I'm not arguing that.
As you like car analogies I've got a pertinent one: If you drive your car around a blind bend at a speed that makes you unable to stop for a pedestrian crossing the road who's to blame? The same applies to bikes.
Comparing a dedicated downhill track to a shared use public road is quite frankly nonsense.
Comparing a dedicated downhill track to a shared use public road is quite frankly nonsense.
Yes, very much this.
If you must compare, then maybe an open track day at the likes of Silverstone would be a better vehicle based analogy.
Don't bother feeding the trolls.
whats the legal standing of a 'dedicated downhill track' though, in this case its on open access land so people can officially wander wherever they like. Even with signage don't underestimate the sheer stupidity of most people (case in point the numpty pushing up in the video 😆 )
Personally I would guess the law would go against the rider as being the one who hit whoever was in the way, even though common sense says (excluding injuries) its the other way round.
[quote=ferrals]whats the legal standing of a 'dedicated downhill track' though, in this case its on open access land so people can officially wander wherever they like. Even with signage don't underestimate the sheer stupidity of most people (case in point the numpty pushing up in the video )
Theres clearly only one possible solution;
[img] 
?1341621509[/img]
No it wouldn't. 'Dedicated downhill track' has absolutely no meaning what so ever to most of the population and certainly nothing legally that exempts you from your responsibilities; you may as well call it the 'jumpy mcjumpface super awesome trail' it means the same thing (nothing).
In fact you'll probably find access to that site is under the CRoW act and cycling is merely permissive, in which case people have every right to walk it much like they do to cross the road. He could call it a 'walking up cos I can track' and would likely have a better claim than the bike rider.
A track day is on private land, doesn't involve members of the public being able to go anywhere they like, large parts of it are fenced to prevent public access, and they'll have staff / Marshalls out - I'm not sure how you struggle with this concept; its either ignorance or idiocy (I know which one I'm leaning towards).
There's little point in me getting into this with you when you have such a poor grasp on access laws / liability. I do hope your insured for riding your bike as you may find it costly if you have an incident like this.
Dammit! What have I missed? Anything new since "Marshals" were mentioned?
Oh. Nope, just the same ground covered... 🙁
It's entirely possible (and likely) though that there is a local bylaw defining it as a cycle track and removing the right to walk there. I'm sure I read somewhere that Swinley has this in place for the official tracks to keep walkers off.
[quote=sr0093193 ]No it wouldn't. 'Dedicated downhill track' has absolutely no meaning what so ever to most of the population and certainly nothing legally that exempts you from your responsibilities; you may as well call it the 'jumpy mcjumpface super awesome trail' it means the same thing (nothing).
In fact you'll probably find access to that site is under the CRoW act and cycling is merely permissive, in which case people have every right to walk it much like they do to cross the road. He could call it a 'walking up cos I can track' and would likely have a better claim than the bike rider.
A track day is on private land, doesn't involve members of the public being able to go anywhere they like, large parts of it are fenced to prevent public access, and they'll have staff / Marshalls out - I'm not sure how you struggle with this concept; its either ignorance or idiocy (I know which one I'm leaning towards).
There's little point in me getting into this with you when you have such a poor grasp on access laws / liability. I do hope your insured for riding your bike as you may find it costly if you have an incident like this.
http://www.chasetrails.co.uk/downhill/
Looks pretty "dedicated" to me
We, as mountain bikers, need to stop being so subservient.
if it's a purpose built mountain bike facility, then we should expect to ride them as such, free from having to giveway to walkers etc.
A tennis court or football pitch are purpose built facilities for those activities. Do you think anyone would walk onto to them when a match was in progress and expect the players to halt their game to let folk have a picnic etc in the middle, or play round them while they did whatever they wanted to do.
On proper shared use trails we absolutely need to behave appropriately, but on dedicated mountain bike trails I feel we should be able to use them as intended and not have to kowtow to thick and/or belligerent non cyclists.
