Edinburgh Cyclist and Jaguar

So unless you want to spend longer getting to work than by car pick a place to cut in,

And herein lies the problem. Are we cycling to beat the cars or because we want to be healthy and cut costs? I commute 30miles once a week and at no point do I ever ‘cut in’. Where I’m turning right I join the queue if traffic at the rear, and wait. It boils my piss to see cyclists filter up the inside of a moving line of vehicles. Ok, they’ll get to work marginally faster but significantly more unsafely.

E_M_C filtering moving traffic you may have a point, stationary traffic I don’t see a problem, like I said wait or filter either method could end up with an impatient cock behind you.

Yes filtering may upset some but just being a cyclist on the road upsets some drivers so… mleh.

Cyclists pass drivers stuck in traffic, drivers pass cyclists when traffic starts to flow; as long as both are done in a reasonable, safe fashion it’s just business as usual.

Ah, OK, so you’re sticking by the assertion that he didn’t give way at the first junction then. Which is quite clearly incorrect given the law I provided a link to, and we can probably judge the rest of your opinions on that basis.

You’re condoning actions that did lead to a conflict between driver and cyclist.

Well I’m condoning one of them. I condone the cyclist being on the road. I don’t condone the driver being a knob.

Because since you’re here again, lets review all of your arguments:

Fails to overtake the Jag properly.

He doesn’t get in front of the Jag, there isn’t room.
He stops on the chevrons and then uses an indication to try and force his way in front of the Jag.

He filters. As I mentioned before, it is normal not to find a gap in a queue big enough to insert a bicycle whilst the queue is stationary. Then when the queue moves off the gaps open up and you can insert yourself into one of them and become part of the traffic. This is the way filtering works, filtering is totally legal, this is what he does. He overtakes the Jag properly after the lights turn green, and is quite clearly completely in front of it before he moves across at all. He doesn’t “force” himself in front of it, simply moves into a space which is available when the traffic is moving. At this point he is now in front of the Jag “holding it up” which is actually the issue here.

Personally as somebody else suggested I think I would have ignored the letter of the law and moved right to the front, but it’s quite clear that plenty on here would condemn him for breaking the law even if it is the safest thing to do (and ignoring cars routinely breaking the law in more dangerous ways). I’m also happy to defer to the only person on this thread with experience of using that junction.

Deliberately positions himself infront of the driver he’s had an altercation with.

We’ve also done this one with you using your non-existent crystal ball. Don’t go claiming you mean he simply inserted himself in the traffic queue – it’s quite clear what you mean. An assertion there is no evidence for at all.

This is about a shit cyclist who deliberately chose to put himself in danger by incorrectly deciding he had priority and trying to force cars to get out of his way, when it wasn’t his.

As I just pointed out, he moved into a gap, no forcing going on – I mean you can’t exactly force anything from a tonne of steel when riding a bicycle. He was in front, he had priority – how he got there is irrelevant, though he didn’t do anything wrong to get there.

I’m guessing using the term “give way lines” is probably causing you greater confusion.

At no point, despite me using the term “give way” do you even for one moment consider that the cyclist should, or even could have given way to the traffic already established on the road he intends to enter.

The only confusion over the give way lines appears to be you misunderstanding what they actually mean – I gave a link to the law to clarify that he did give way.

Sitting in the traffic won’t stop cars cutting you up.

What are you talking about?
It was the cyclist who cut up the driver in the video that we are discussing, not the other way around.[/quote]

Let’s review this one on the basis of the law on giving way I linked to – it’s not directly applicable, but it seems a reasonable basis to use. Did the cyclist do anything “likely to endanger the driver of or any passenger in a vehicle”? Did the cyclist “cause the driver of such a vehicle to change its speed or course in order to avoid an accident”? No – the driver was in no danger, didn’t have to brake, and only had to change course because he decided to overtake, not to avoid an accident. Not exactly “cutting up” is it? The cyclist just positioned himself in front of the car, which seems to result in an issue due to the normalisation that cyclists should get out of the way.

Of course all of that is irrelevant to the driver maintaining his anger and hitting the cyclist with his car further up the road. You claim it is a single incident, but it isn’t – the second bit is only related to the first by the driver’s anger.

er, I think it’s here:

I’m implying he may have fallen off without contact because he wasn’t paying attention to what he was doing

though I was previously referring to this:

I dont see any contact there.

If you think there was no contact, then you think the cyclist is making up the collision – I’m not sure what other possible interpretation there is, or how that is twisting things.

perhaps, or they could have been that curious breed who are patient for other drivers but gets nowty with cyclists – we’ve no idea same as prior to incident we didn’t know about jag driver (car prejudices aside)

They might have been, that’s not something you can really factor for is it?

But on the balance of probabilities I’d say that behaving like other vehicles and accepting the place offered behind the blue car with eye contact and a cheery wave of thanks to the courteous driver of the red car is far less likely to end in conflict than filtering up the left (illegally or not) then cutting in front of a shiny penis extension because you actually want to turn right.

(again this doesn’t excuse how the Jag driver responded)

hitting the cyclist with his car

I don’t think there is any proof that that happened, which is probably partly why the guy himself hasn’t reported it. Anyone who actually was hit by a car would report it instantly.

I see you are still condoning the actions that did lead to conflict.
An interesting position to take.
I’ll point out why you are still clearly wrong, but it will have to wait until later.

Merry Christmas.
In a twist of fate, try staying on the moors and keeping off the roads.
🙂

I don’t think there is any proof that that happened, which is probably partly why the guy himself hasn’t reported it. Anyone who actually was hit by a car would report it instantly.
[/quote]

I’ve seen plenty of threads on here where people have been hit by cars and not reported it. People don’t report getting hit by cars, mainly because they’re not sure what good it will do or have reported incidents before and little was done. It might take hours of their time and nothing happens – easy to become a cynic.

Oh, look what the cyclist has to say in the comments:
“I ask because I’m not sure what good it will do. Ive had worse and little was done.”
“They ‘have a word’ and it takes 3 hours of my time and nothing happens. 😛 i am becoming a cycnic”

Anything new happened?

It boils my piss to see cyclists filter up the inside of a moving line of vehicles

This is why I always mount the pavement to do it safer and they wont mow you down afterwards

And herein lies the problem. Are we cycling to beat the cars or because we want to be healthy and cut costs?

I don’t think it is a problem. I suspect most people do it for both reasons (& others)

I very much doubt that filtering has a statistically significant effect on the safety (or otherwise) of cycling for transport (so long as we exclude those people who filter down the inside of lorries turning left, but that isn’t what we’re discussing).

Are we cycling to beat the cars or because we want to be healthy and cut costs?

STRAVAAAAAA!!!

http://www.strava.com/segments/2555256

It surprises me in this day and age that people will spend pages/hours debating what might have happened when they could just message the guy on youtube and ask him to clarify what happened. He might not respond, but since he saw fit to post the video I imagine he’d be only too happy to discuss what’s happened. Especially on a cycling forum.

FWIW I don’t imagine the Jag would have sped off like that, nor would the bus driver have had that look on his face had there not been some contact. He might not have properly shunted him but that’s hardly the point. In my mind if you try to hit a cyclist with your car it’s no different than trying to hit a pedestrian and should be viewed as a serious crime.

Comment on youtube? Are you insane? It’s depressing enough discussing it on here.

Looks like he stalled and fell off. He needs to learn to track stand better while arguing with motorists.

Adds chunky to the list 🙄

D0NK – Member

Comment on youtube? Are you insane? It’s depressing enough discussing it on here.

No you could just message him directly. Though that’s nowhere near as interesting as hypothesizing.

No you could just message him directly

Not immediately obvious how I do that, however as the vid title says “jag driver tried to knock me off and eventually succeeds” and a good proportion of people here don’t believe it, me posting “I spoke to edinburgh cyclist and he says X” probably isn’t going to make any difference.

Let the hypothesising continue 🙂

sbob – Member
aracer – Member
When and how?

The cyclist pulls left out of the minor road and starts overtaking the line of cars.
He fails to do this properly as there isn’t enough room to get in front of the Jag due to the car in front, and there isn’t enough room to get in front of the first car due to the stop line.

No, but being in front does.
He doesn’t get in front of the Jag, there isn’t room.
He stops on the chevrons and then uses an indication to try and force his way in front of the Jag.
Like most bellends on the road, the cyclist’s impatience is his downfall.
He went for an overtake that wasn’t on and left himself in a position he shouldn’t have been in.
He never established himself in the lane.
He would have been better establishing himself when he emerged from the minor road, either behind the red car or possibly between the blue and red car.
Notice how the red car is observing the “keep clear” road markings?
This means he’s either broken down in a coincidental location, or he is actually obeying road signs.
This is a good indication that the driver might not actually be a massive cock, and might provide an opportunity to safely pull out.

Unlike the driver of the Jag, who, thanks to the insight of bigjim, is pretty much guaranteed to be a cock.

Oh I give up. You lot have all clearly been brainwashed by the idea that cyclists must get out of the way of cars
That’s not what happened.
This isn’t about why the cyclist had to get out the way of the car.
This is about a shit cyclist who deliberately chose to put himself in danger by incorrectly deciding he had priority and trying to force cars to get out of his way, when it wasn’t his.

POSTED 22 HOURS AGO #
This^
100% rider fail fom the off.

I’ve messaged him

Did you point him at this thread? That should be entertaining 🙂

aracer – Member

Adds chunky to the list

*whoosh*

Yep 😈

It wasn’t a great bit of traffic dodging by the rider. May have been looking for the bike box thing at the front of the queue? They seem to be quite random, I’ve got to the front of traffic queues many times only to be left with no box and a dodgy position.
But, and it’s a big butt, nothing excuses the actions of the driver. Cyclist was a bit shit, jag driver totally insane, should be in jail. No comparison, and nothing the rider did could possibly have justified the actions of the jag.

Well I suppose if he outs himself on here we’ll know for sure that his judgment is shit

Rider turned up to defend himself (quite well) on the clarkson incident a while back, tho IIRC He was a forumite prior to the incident.

Cyclist was getting the usual criticism there aswell – someone even managed to shoehorn a helmet cam warrior dig in there despite it being the driver with the camera.

Well I suppose if he outs himself on here we’ll know for sure that his judgment is shit

😆

Cyclist was bit complete bat shit mental, jag driver totally insane expected behaviour

FTFY

Remind me to cut down on coagulated milk protein based foodstuffs…….

“My crystal ball/blatant construction says he was riding fixed on a road bike and caught the front mudguard with his foot.”
by the magic trick of watching the video I saw he was on a blue mountain bike with suspension forks and no mud guard .
You can also judge that he was very close to the car at the point he goes down and that the cars front wheels are turned in on him slightly so the driver either steered into him or was wanting to drive into the space where the bus was .

Good evening fellow cyclists! 😀

aracer – Member

Ah, OK, so you’re sticking by the assertion that he didn’t give way at the first junction then. Which is quite clearly incorrect given the law I provided a link to, and we can probably judge the rest of your opinions on that basis.

I think it’s pretty clear to everyone that he didn’t give way at the first junction, as he didn’t stop until he was on the chevrons.

Speaking of his positioning at the chevrons, your bias is so evident that having a sensible discussion about what happened with you is almost entirely futile, but then it’s not quite my bedtime yet. 🙂

It is quite clear that there isn’t room between the lead car and the chevrons to park a bike and the front of his bike was alongside the rear of the lead car when he stopped, which is utterly apparent when he looks round at 32 seconds.
There is not even enough room to pass the Jag without entering the chevrons.
No one in their right mind would consider passing that Jag so closely as to not enter the chevron when they could simply enter the chevron.

This is all the proof I need of your ridiculous bias.

Well I’m condoning one of them. I condone the cyclist being on the road. I don’t condone the driver being a knob.

I don’t condone the driver being a knob either, but unlike you I don’t condone the actions that led to the altercation.

He filters. As I mentioned before, it is normal not to find a gap in a queue big enough to insert a bicycle whilst the queue is stationary.

Then it is a poor overtake, and one shouldn’t commence.

Then when the queue moves off the gaps open up and you can insert yourself into one of them and become part of the traffic.

If that was a car indicating right and expecting a cyclist to halt his journey and let the car go first, you wouldn’t be defending the driver.

This is the way filtering works, filtering is totally legal, this is what he does.

Many things are perfectly legal and perfectly inadvisable at the same time.
You may be surprised to hear that cars can overtake other traffic quite legally whilst occupying the same lane, which would be a pretty good definition of the term “filtering”, that you seem happy to repeat.

Doesn’t mean it isn’t a really shit idea to commence the overtake with no plan to complete the manoeuvre.

He overtakes the Jag properly after the lights turn green

He never overtakes the Jag properly because he fails to overtake the Jag, instead he stops to the left of it, leaving himself in a silly position.

and is quite clearly completely in front of it before he moves across at all.

So he pulls in front of an accelerating car?
This is the action you condone?
Crazy!

He doesn’t “force” himself in front of it, simply moves into a space which is available when the traffic is moving. At this point he is now in front of the Jag “holding it up” which is actually the issue here

So at the point of completing his overtake, the cyclist is “holding up” the Jag?
You mean the Jag would have had to “change its speed or course in order to avoid an accident”?

BOOM!

There’s your failure to give way.

Personally as somebody else suggested I think I would have ignored the letter of the law and moved right to the front

You would have moved to the front because you favour impatience over safety.
I would have pulled out of the initial minor road behind the blue car because like more than one other poster here, *I put safety first.

We’ve also done this one with you using your non-existent crystal ball. Don’t go claiming you mean he simply inserted himself in the traffic queue – it’s quite clear what you mean. An assertion there is no evidence for at all.

You were the crystal ball wielder who claimed to know what the chap was thinking.
I really don’t know what you are talking about here.

The cyclist and the driver had an altercation.
This is not something you can deny.
The cyclist then positioned himself in front of that motorist.
This is also not something you can deny.

Just in case you have written so much twaddle you have forgotten the content of the video, between 45 and 55 seconds, you can see the altercation.
At approx 1 min 48 seconds the cyclist positions himself in front of the Jag.
I’m not sure how you are failing to understand this. Hopefully the times I’ve given will aide you, lest I try typing really slowly.

As I just pointed out, he moved into a gap, no forcing going on – I mean you can’t exactly force anything from a tonne of steel when riding a bicycle. He was in front, he had priority – how he got there is irrelevant, though he didn’t do anything wrong to get there.

As I’ve pointed out, there was no gap, he wasn’t in front, he didn’t have priority, how he got there is relevant, and he was wrong from the off.
Yep, just checked and I’ve already explained all of those points.

The only confusion over the give way lines appears to be you misunderstanding what they actually mean – I gave a link to the law to clarify that he did give way.

And I’ve shown above, due to your own admissions, that he did not.
Remind me though who he did give way to?
😛

The next (your last) bit is interesting and is further confirmation of your bias.
You reposted a quote:

Sitting in the traffic won’t stop cars cutting you up.

So a stationary bicycle can be cut up by a car, but you then argue that the stationary car couldn’t have been cut up by the cyclist?

It’s all just selfishness, and it clouds your judgement and ability to discuss this rationally.

Have a think about that, and stay safe on the roads aracer.
I really mean it.
And Happy Christmas.

There was an asterix up in that there essay…

*I really don’t put safety first.
Shenanigans are my number one priority.
In reality I would have come out of the initial minor road straight over onto the path opposite, followed the bend round still on the path then hopped over the central reservation where soon after I would casually ride no handed whilst rolling a cigarette as the Jag went past unnoticed and without incident.

Icing on the cake?

I own a Jag.
😆