[Closed] Banned from cycling to work

so he's still allowed to train as normal, then drive home and do a 36 mile ride on the same roads?

or is he banned from riding at all?

Quite surprised he needs to increase his training - surely that should be covered by what he does with the club?

Still, I can see their point - if I fall off my bike and twist my ankle it's a pain but I can still work, your mate would be off work for 6 weeks right in the middle of the championship.

They pay him to perform physically.

If he comes off the bike and injures himself he is out of action and they are wasting money on a player who cant play, this kind of thing is quite normal in sports contracts.

Back in the 90s didnt the singer Seal have a 'no motorbikes' clause written into his contract by his record label?

If he wants to do some extra training there is plenty else he could be doing in a more controlled environment....or he could test the waters and see if its cycling in general they dont want him doing or road cycling in particular...if its road cycling then he can still go mountain biking could he not?

I should imagine he's on reasonable money, even Championship footballers get decent wages these days, i wouldnt rock the boat...his playing career will be short enough anyway without any additonal injuries from being knocked off his bike....if he becomes a trouble maker they'll sell him, how much does he like his job?!

Apparently banned from cycling into training but can do as he pleases in his own time. Ludicrous !!

Lots of professional sportsmen are restricted to what other sports/activities they are allowed to take part in.

Injuries cost a fortune, and they are simply protecting their investment.

He could always get a Job in a shop or something, if he doesn't like it 😉

You can sort of see the point
lots of pro sportyfolk are prevented from skiing n'shit - I'd guess they're more worried about him picking up minor injuries than being squashed (if that happened, I suppose they'd just strike him off the accounts and buy a new player; if he's injured they have to keep paying him and for his rehab etc). I bet they'd flip if he said he was going going out mtbing instead

Good mate who was a pro, packed up about 5 years ago was never allowed to do anything remotely exciting. No mopeds on holiday no jet skis etc etc.
Obviously he would do mown again but if anything had happened, he would have been in breach of contract.

Apparently banned from cycling into training but can do as he pleases in his own time. Ludicrous

Could be an insurance thing then, not sure about legislation in the UK but here in Spain your journey to/from work is considered part of your working day and is covered by labour law.

Given the job he had I'd day it was pretty reasonable. Its a pretty special case. I was chatting to some of the UK skeleton bob team recently. They spend a big chunk of the year at various winter resorts and aren't allowed to go skiing.

Roughly one KSI per million miles in the UK, so at 8k miles per year he'd have about 0.8% chance of a KSI per year by my reckoning.

Can't really see what right the employers have to decide what he does outside of work hours myself 😕

Pretty standard for a pro player, and unless it was specified in his training plan wtf is he doing so much extra work on top of his prescribed training and fitness plan?

He'd better not play for the mighty Tractor Boys! 👿

[quote=mogrim ]Could be an insurance thing then, not sure about legislation in the UK but here in Spain your journey to/from work is considered part of your working day and is covered by labour law.

Same here (Luxembourg). Crash your car on an icy road on the way to work, slip at the train station etc and you're hurt and it's somehow down to the company and is reported as such. The flip side of that is the government pays us 90% of the salary back for sick days so it's swings and roundabouts. The argument our HR gave me was that you're only traveling at that time and location because you are coming to work.

Roughly one KSI per million miles in the UK, so at 8k miles per year he'd have about 0.8% chance of a KSI per year by my reckoning.

Whatever a KSI is, at those stats it's more like 0.008% chance.

I think sometimes things like this are put into players contracts , i seem to remember a sunderland player having a clause in his contract saying he could not go into space ! . You can understand it from the clubs point of view .

Didnt Kimi hurt himself crashing a dirt bike and told Ferari he did it in the gym or something, protecting their investment I would call it.

Championship you say? If he plays for Leeds, could you suggest he gets his extra training on a Saturday afternoon by running around the pitch a little harder??? 😉

Rachel

Whatever a KSI is, at those stats it's more like 0.008% chance.

KSI = killed or seriously injured, and I made it 8,000 miles cycled per year / 1,000,000 miles per KSI which means 0.008 or 0.8% surely?

Ksi = killed or seriously injured

In the uk there is no liability on employers however they travel to work. Even if they are hurt on the road whilst driving for their employer it's still not reportable to the hse.

I suspect this is about not turning up for training tired from an hour on the bike and not being able to do the training session effectively.

Seems reasonable to me.

KSI isn't that relevant, though. Even a minor injury would effect the performance of a professional sportsman

Which player/club?

I would understand this if it was in central london as thats where the high profile accidents have been, anywhere else seems a little pedantic.

If it was me I would make sure the coach is aware of the additional effort and clear it with him, thats just common sense where a job is based on his physical perfomance BUT as soon as I type these words I think, there must be quite a few 'ordinary jobs' where the work is physical and the outside of work additional effort might impact the day to day work... so... I think it becomes the responsibility of the employee to make sure they can do their job be it a pro footballer or manual laborer. employers cant dictate what you do outside of work but the employee needs to take some responsibility for his actions.

[i]0.8%[/i]

so you have a nearly 1 in 100 chance of being killed or seriously injured if you ride 8000 road miles a year?

that doesn't strike me as good odds?

yes like he will say that rob

Seems reasonable given what he does and what he gets paid.

Lots cannot do certain things iirc due to insurance issues

Not sure how they could enforce this mind unless it is in his contract

My cousin was an Olympian speedskater who, like most speedskaters, cycled through the summer for training purposes. He was contractually bound by his sponsors to avoid mountain biking, though, and he wasn't allowed to downhill ski in the winter.

Not cycling to work when you play for a professional football club seems consistent.

The training must be a bit soft if he fancies a 17 mile ride afterwards.

Is it all feigning penalties practice?

Or maybe being angry at the ref practice?

A pro rugby player friend asked if he could come and try MTBing out with me a while ago. I had to turn him down. If his club found out that he'd injured himself whilst MTBing, he'd be sacked. He didn't make that connection for himself. Too many blunt force traumas I reckon!

The odds of death are quite a lot lower than serious injury (about 1/30th IIRC).

But, even doing a cumulative probability wotsit, after 8k miles, its approx 0.8%. Tiny bit less, but close enough.

Whatever a KSI is, at those stats it's more like 0.008% chance.

care to share how you got 0.008%?

Is this one step too far in an employer trying to protect their workforce ?

Not imo. I agree with the decision.

KSI isn't that relevant, though. Even a minor injury would effect the performance of a professional sportsman

True. Though my gut reaction is that an hour of cycling is statistically less likely to produce an injury than an hour of football training.

Is this one step too far in an employer trying to protect their workforce ?

I bumped into mark webber (f1) at Woburn once and apparently he was a bit of a regular there (redbull based in mk). I was quite surprised red bull sanctioned him to ride mtb!

Though my gut reaction is that an hour of cycling is statistically less likely to produce an injury than an hour of football training.

Though my gut reaction is that an hour of cycling is statistically less likely to produce an injury than an hour of football training.

Yes but it's not either/or. He's going to be doing the football, so the cycling, whatever the risk, is additional.

Cycling is still statistically safer than diving (outside London). So if it's a danger thing then I am sure he can argue it if he wants. I'd fight it, but then I'm not a pro footballer.
As for the training, they don't do huge amounts, you will probably be surprised how much they do.

There was interview in the local paper with a player who was one of the kids is the same youth team Beckham, Scholes, Giggs, etc. He said that they all did extra sessions. IIRC Beckham did an extra session with the kids in the age group above and a couple hours working on dead balls as well as their standard training every day. The chap being interviewed did not, he just did the basic.

[i] statistically less likely to produce an injury than an hour of football training. [/i]

Those aren't real injuries, they're pretending see? That's a valid part of being a footballer.

The original thing is just absolute nonsense though. he's far more likely to injure himself driving to work (especially since he's a footballer) , walking down the stairs or having a shower. Pathetic. They've not even thought about it.

Seems strange, if I was injured riding to work then my company would be in the same position as his football team, a man down.
Doesn't seem to make any sense.

How much did you cost your company though? And would a relatively minor injury stop you doing your job?

Those aren't real injuries, they're pretending see?

A friend of a friend lost his leg as a result of a bad tackle.

All a bit stupid really.

I can see what they are trying to do, but on balance he is just as likely to get injured doing gardening, a spot of DIY, crossing the road, or just having a bath. I doubt they ban those things as well.

Many sports folk / celebrities have limitations put on what they can/can't do.

As above their trainig must be crap if he can consider cycling in and out.

Also is cycling really the best sort of training for football? One is about fast explosive work, the other about long sustained none sprint work.

Doesnt sound that proffesional to me from the club, or his point of view on how they approach their fitness.

must have been one hell of a tackle to kick his leg that far that it was lost 🙂

The original thing is just absolute nonsense though. he's far more likely to injure himself driving to work (especially since he's a footballer) , walking down the stairs or having a shower. Pathetic. [b]They've not even thought about it.[/b]

I'm pretty sure they have 🙄

They insure their players because they are business assets.

Their insurance will cover their players for driving to work

By the sound of it, their insurance doesn't cover the players for cycling to work.

So their players are not allowed to do it.

regarding riding to and from work and doing it in your free time there is a difference too in that normally for work you will be travelling during commuting times when traffic is highest and thus coming across an idiot or someone who is tired is more likely than going out for a sunday ride and choose not to if the weather is bad.

[i]I'm pretty sure they have

They insure their players because they are business assets.

Their insurance will cover their players for driving to work

By the sound of it, their insurance doesn't cover the players for cycling to work. [/i]

SOMEONE, hasn't even thought about it. Either them or their insurance company.

When I got life insurance, and I accept that I'm nowhere near as valuable as a football player, I was refused at more than once place because at the time I raced (push) bikes. I can count the number of people I've heard about dying in bike races on one hand but they deemed it to be dangerous. Bonkers.

or just having a bath

Be careful out there kids

Not in every footballer's contract
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/santa-cruz-is-on-his-bike-901165
Mind you the club were probably hoping he would get knocked down so they could cash in on his insurance.

They insure their players because they are business assets.

That argument could be extended to pretty much anyone in [i]any[/i] job though.

"Sorry, you can't go cycling, skiing, scuba diving, climbing, running, hillwalking, gardening, etc etc. You are a company asset. When you are not here we expect you to remain safely at home eating company-approved produce with a safety spork." 😐

I read this place ....very few of us an asset to our work [ or our sport or humanity] 😉

SOMEONE, hasn't even thought about it. Either them or their insurance company.

So it's not them anymore then 😉

Insurance works on real historical actuarial tables.

If in the past they have paid out on claims caused by cycling, then they either increase the prices accordingly, or they exclude it from the policy.

Even though it may seem like it, insurance companies don't just "guess stuff"

They have [b]really[/b] boring people who work stuff out based on actual data.

That argument could be extended to pretty much anyone in any job though.

When was the last time your company paid a few million up front just to get someone to agree to come and work there ?

Insurance works on real historical actuarial tables.

If in the past they have paid out on claims caused by cycling, then they either increase the prices accordingly, or they exclude it from the policy.

Yep, and past historical data will tell you that if you ban your employees from [i]EVERYTHING[/i] then it will minimise the chance of injury and an insurance payout.

That doesn't make it a sound choice. 😀

That's different.

Insurance companies work out insurance premiums based on historical data.

Football clubs work out what they will allow their players to do based on the costs of the insurance and what they can include at a price they are happy with.

It's not that complicated really, and pretty sensible too.

It's no different to how you might decide on insuring your bike.

If you lock it in the garage every night, your insurance will be cheaper than if you chain it to the front gate.
Even though chaining it to the front gate might be more convenient, and save you having to move the lawnmower.

Surely they've done it to free up for coke and hookers? 😉

It's no different to how you might decide on insuring your bike.

If you lock it in the garage every night, your insurance will be cheaper than if you chain it to the front gate.

Exactly. Keep your employees locked in their houses every night and the insurance will be cheaper.

But that doesn't make those employees fitter, happier, healthier, more productive, comfortable or get on better with associate employee contemporaries. 😉

A goalkeeper - spannish Zubbaletta [ spell??] missed the World cup as he trapped his big toe in the tap whilst having a bath.

Sounds like a mis-remembered story - Cañizares missed a world cup (in 2002) when he dropped a bottle of after-shave on his foot, severing a tendon.

Specificity in training is a reasonable argument against cycling perhaps.

I don't think this is at all uncommon for pro footballers, and reasonable considering the investment from the club and wages paid - he can ride a bike when he retires. Pretty sure clauses like this are why so many play golf and like horse racing.

Exactly. Keep your employees locked in their houses every night and the insurance will be cheaper.

But that doesn't make those employees fitter, happier, healthier, more productive, comfortable or get on better with associate employee contemporaries.

So you think a professional footballer would be struggling to keep up fitness wise without his cycle commute to the training ground ?

I presume you are still talking about the professional footballer and haven't digressed onto other types of Employee who aren't insured by their employers and as a result are allowed to cycle wherever they want.

A goalkeeper - spannish Zubbaletta [ spell??] missed the World cup as he trapped his big toe in the tap whilst having a bath.

Sounds like a mis-remembered story - Cañizares missed a world cup (in 2002) when he dropped a bottle of after-shave on his foot, severing a tendon

So you think a professional footballer would be struggling to keep up fitness wise without his cycle commute to the training ground ?

Well as others said if he is using it to "top up" training then yes it sounds like his fitness might suffer without it.

More importantly perhaps I think him being restricted from doing something he enjoys outside of work hours might impact his happiness. Which isn't good for his performance or loyalty to the club.

I presume you are still talking about the professional footballer and haven't digressed

Yes I did digress.

Did you? Or are you saying insurance actuaries have historical data showing high levels of performance-restricting injury amongst UK professional footballers that cycle? That seems like a pretty small group to derive a statistically significant prediction from.

Did you? Or are you saying insurance actuaries have historical data showing high levels of performance-restricting injury amongst UK professional footballers that cycle? That seems like a pretty small group to derive a statistically significant prediction from.

People living in my street driving a 2001 LHD Projekt Zwo VW Multivan imported from Germany are a pretty small sample group too.

Yet somehow they managed to come up with a premium for my insurance.

Must have just guessed it eh 😉

Funny because loads of other similar companies seemed to "guess" a premium that was within a few quid of what I paid.

Yes but the thing is one stolen/crashed van is much the same as another, so a sample of the superset provides a reasonable enough estimate. Not sure the same can be said for the relative risk of cycling injury to professional footballers versus say middle-aged obese IT Consultants 😀

[i]If in the past they have paid out on claims caused by cycling, then they either increase the prices accordingly, or they exclude it from the policy.

Even though it may seem like it, insurance companies don't just "guess stuff" [/i]

Yeah, after I thought about it on the way home I figured they probably don't have enough actuary data to know whether cycling is dangerous or not but they hear about people being killed every day in that there London so it must be dangerous. Anything that sounds dangerous but they don't actually know about gets written in to the policy as not allowed.

Which is a bit like guessing. 😉

The irony being, footballers aside, that it's actually more dangerous sitting on your couch watching TV than it is cycling about the place.

[i]Funny because loads of other similar companies seemed to "guess" a premium that was within a few quid of what I paid. [/i]

Ah well, that's the insurance companies colluding on the price. 😉

I went riding with a friend in Nelson last year and another guy was there, who it turns out was mark webber. He did say that it was a bit naughty and that he wasn't contractually allowed to MTB within certain periods of the year. Fit as a butchers dog through and reasonably handy on a bike. Nice fella as well.

A goalkeeper - spannish Zubbaletta [ spell??] missed the World cup as he trapped his big toe in the tap whilst having a bath.
Sounds like a mis-remembered story - Cañizares missed a world cup (in 2002) when he dropped a bottle of after-shave on his foot, severing a tendon

I think David James (keeper for ??? and england) "injured" himself playing on his x-box didn't he ?

Must be a goalkeeper thing! Dave Beasant did his foot dropping a bottle of salad cream on it.

Darius Vassell ended up out of a few games with an infected big toe. He decided he'd put a pin through his toenail to relieve the pressure of a black toenail. Pushed the pin in too far and it went in to his toe (ouch!).

I went riding with a friend in Nelson last year and another guy was there, who it turns out was mark webber. He did say that it was a bit naughty and that he [b]wasn't contractually allowed to MTB within certain periods of the year[/b]. Fit as a butchers dog through and reasonably handy on a bike. Nice fella as well.

Hardly surprising seeing as he had a massive mountain biking injury* just before the start of the F1 season a couple of years ago

*Well, it wasn't really a mountain biking injury - he was knocked off his bike by a car IIRC...

Not sure the same can be said for the relative risk of cycling injury to professional footballers versus say middle-aged obese IT Consultants

No employer is insuring middle aged obese IT consultants though.

So the comparison isn't needed.

So the comparison isn't needed.

And yet they are making it? Unless, contrary to what you said earlier, they really are basing their actuary data purely on performance-limiting injuries suffered by professional footballers whilst cycling.

Anyway my [i]main[/i] point is being lost which is that restricting (any) employee's normal out-of-work activities may "protect your asset" and allow cheaper insurance, but it may have hidden costs in terms of happiness, loyalty and performance which are harder for bean counters to measure.

Cycle most of the way - walk the last bit. Technically not cycling to work.

TBH I can see why he has been banned.

Its not hysteria. If you fall off your bike (pothole, slide off, etc etc) and break your wrist you can happily tap away on your pc at work with one hand.

Its his job 100% to be 100% functional. I don't see the issue.

Its his job 100% to be 100% functional. I don't see the issue

It's no issue provided of course that they also ban other activities that can also lead to injury such as driving, walking and having a bath.

I don't see the issue.

You're really not trying hard enough.

See earlier posts in the first two pages for details of how to be appalled by perfectly sensible decisions that you don't know the details of 😉

driving, walking and having a bath.

Great anecdote. Don't forget he must also eat mushed up food.

Great anecdote.

Over 200,000 people are injured on the roads every year. ([url= https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/245383/rrcgb2012-00.pdf ]DfT 2012[/url])
There are roughly 95,000 injuries in bathrooms a year. ([url= http://www.hassandlass.org.uk/reports/2002data.pdf ]HASS 2002[/url])

They wouldn't dream of banning someone from driving or taking baths.

The fact that they feel able to ban someone from cycling shows how messed up our national views are. I wonder how many Dutch players cycle?

I wonder how many Dutch players cycle?

I know this one, well sort of. I know a couple of guys who play for PSV but they aren’t Dutch. They don’t cycle to training or anywhere else because they’re not allowed. They aren’t allowed to drive to training either, the club sends a car for them.

Really? Blimey! oh well there goes my point 😆

Just shows how messed up the Dutch national view of cycling is though eh ? 😉

I know of a few footballers some who are paid stupid stupid stupid money and played in the premier league

It's often in there contracts , another similar point is they aren't allowed to ride motor cycles neither, again most of these things are in there contracts

You'd be surprised as good a life as they have / money they earn some of things they are contracted not to do!