And hardly conspiracy theory to think that a sponsored person may have an interest in helping their sponsor sell something.

It’s true, I did wonder why he kept going on about some great new satellite tv deals he’d been enjoying.

I love the “I was in the netherlands” comments – if the UK ever gets close to 50% of the cycling infrastructure they have then maybe their attitudes can be brought over.

Here is your occasional reminder that a lot of the infrastructure in the Netherlands is new, and the result of political action. It didn’t just happen to be there.

I love the “I was in the netherlands” comments – if the UK ever gets close to 50% of the cycling infrastructure they have then maybe their attitudes can be brought over.

That’s why I specified not in Amsterdam. Not sure how much time you have spent in the Netherlands but it is a misnomer to believe that the cycling infrastructure is deployed uniformly nationwide. Large towns and cities undoubtedly, but not the more outlying areas. Effectively no need. Attitudes to cycling seem to be universal however.

I should point out that he also says he’s a Remainer. Does that help?

Not really relevant to this thread. I suspect most people living in continental europe are remainers aint they…well apart from the terminally stupid.

If you have read the original interview can you confirm or not that he said helmets should be compulsory?

I love the “I was in the netherlands” comments – if the UK ever gets close to 50% of the cycling infrastructure they have then maybe their attitudes can be brought over.

Yes and that will never happen whilst those people in society who are pro cycling think cycling in London is crazy.

Yes and that will never happen whilst those people in society who are pro cycling think cycling in London is crazy.

I love cycling in London. Now, would I suggest my mum or my son cycle in London…? It’s a good kind of crazy for me, maybe a bad kind of crazy for them.

It’s a good kind of crazy for me, maybe a bad kind of crazy for them.

Maybe, maybe not. Some people have to cycle remember. However prominent members of society branding it as crazy will influence the anti cycling briggade  to see it as crazy and lead them to conclude they need not change their aggressive attitude when behind the wheel or see any changes to infrastructure to benefit cyclists as just another “crazy” idea that only benefits the crazy.

Yes and that will never happen whilst those people in society who are pro cycling think cycling in London is crazy.

Too crowded, not enough cycle lanes/separation, too many competing people, piss poor attitudes from drivers, junctions with no design or thought for anyone since a horse and cart?

How would you describe cycling in London?

How would you describe cycling in London?

Necessary for many and clearly not crazy as huge numbers of people do it everyday and also no different from cycling in central birmigham or manchester or wherever.

Right…. Given the numbers of people driving round city centres and rat runs through necessity and choice I think I can still call that crazy but each to their own definitions eh.

Can I just point out that the cycling deaths, in London at least, show that a hard hat offers no protection from being dragged under a bus or truck…

Wow! This was one question in an hour interview. It’s nothing I’ve ever thought about. So when asked I thought… I always wear one and I’d advise all children to wear them so

Didn’t realise people felt so passionately about helmets

Doesnt help change my opinion of him?

Given the numbers of people driving round city centres and rat runs through necessity and choice I think I can still call that crazy

Seems like a stupid chocce of word at best to me

I was at a MTB trail once. There were people everywhere, it was crazy. There was a big drop off through rocks, I thought ‘you’d have to be crazy to ride that’. Launched into it, rode through it and high-fived “that was crazy maaann…”

Seems like a stupid chocce of word at best to me

Or just the word he used – having ridden through parts of Manchester crazy is a good word to describe launching off the lights to try and avoid cars running red lights through a sea of potholes with busses and piss poor road markings . With cycle lanes that spit you out into ridiculous bits of traffic and have zero enforcement of parked cars etc.

It’s all relative. Did some pro navigation this week which unexpectedly tried to spit me out for 1km of fun and games on the A19 dual carriageway. Thought about it for a minute, decided that would be crazy, then turned back and went via the most bramble-infested BW I’ve ever experienced.

To the cyclists who regularly use the A19, for time trials or whatever, maybe I was the crazy one.

Can I just point out that the cycling deaths, in London at least, show that a hard hat offers no protection from being dragged under a bus or truck…

In all likelihood wearing a seatbelt would not have helped the victims of the Morandi bridge collapse. Let’s stop wearing seatbelts.

A good example I think some TT courses are a bit crazy (for want of a better word). However if I were to be famous and interviewed in a newspaper I would defend their right to do it and explain that if drivers drove properly the risks would be minimal. I wouldnt just say that the tters were crazy.

“it does seem a bit crazy” and “they do seem a bit crazy” are worlds apart.

Unless you’re on a mission to find something to fret about I guess . . . .   😉

“it does seem a bit crazy”[/i] and <em class=”bbcode-em”>“they do seem a bit crazy” are worlds apart.

True, needs more context

You know he didn’t say Cyclists were crazy don’t you. You have interpreted that, probably in the mindset of having just been told to put your helmet on.

He is also quoted as saying

The 32-year-old also said cyclists and drivers should “share the road”, rather than seeing each other as “enemies”.

Which is kind of where you were going too.

In the specific case of TT I would seriously question racing on some roads especially in a discipline which is pushing people really hard and with distractions for the rider like trying to maintain power levels and checking timings along a course rather than fully concentrating on their surroundings. Drivers should also be educated better and take more responsibility.

The Welshman also revealed that, apart from races, he had “never ridden a bike in London”.

He added: “I’ve watched from a taxi and it does seem a bit crazy. “

In the absence of anything extra it suggests here that its cycling thats crazy not the situation. I would be very happy to be proven wring if anyone has the original Times interview to hand.

In the specific case of TT I would seriously question racing on some roads

Me too but as I said above if I was famous and being interviewed I would be careful what I said. I couldnt imagine Boardman would shoot himself in the foot like this and Froome would mostly likely side step it too.

He even tweeted in the aftermath he never realised people got so passionate about helmets…that would be fine coming from my mum but is pretty unbelievable from a keen cyclists!

That’s not my interpretation of that line. Most unitiated people who look at the melee of cyclists and motorised traffic in parts of London would think ‘it’ was a bit crazy. I used to think just driving generally in parts of London was a bit of a mad experience.

Also, he’s allowed to have a view on whether helmets are worthwhile/necessary, and you’re entitled to disagree. Whether you feel the need to do it respectfully or not is more a reflection on you than him

This is pretty much exactly my thoughts . He is just as entitled to have an opinion on the subject as you.. Gt come across as a thoroughly decent bloke, whilst judging by a few of your more recent postings, you come across as the opposite.

Either way.. I know who’s opinion I’d rather listen to..

This is what he tweeted today

“Wow! This was one question in an hour interview. It’s nothing I’ve ever thought about. So when asked I thought… I always wear one and I’d advise all children to wear them”.

My view is if you are arse up head down on a road bike, it’s a good idea to wear a helmet. It shouldn’t necessary if you are nipping to the shops but that requires a change in attitude amongst all road users to cyclists and improvements to cycling infrastructure.

anagallis_arvensis… bit stupid?

Actually op, apologies.. I have you mixed up with someone with a similar user name when I was referring to recent posting history

Don’t agree with your sentiments in this thread still however but please ignore the last bit of my post!

mike, I don’t know your stance on compulsory wearing of helmets, however I reckon your posts are pretty sensible.

I have not heard so far what I believe to be a compelling reason not to wear a helmet on the roads. A wasp might get into it, or it is a hassle to find one if only popping round the corner for a pint of milk, or I like the freedom and the wind in my hair, or a helmet does not prevent injury or death in some situations are not valid reasons in my opinion.

I am regularly required to remove my 3 kids car seats from the car and replace them. This is a ball ache, especially if I am only popping to the shops with them. I am not likely to have an accident in that time, but it still gets done, as it becomes automatic.

Safety measures will never prevent all deaths, but it is no reason not to try. Drivers do tend to hold dominance on the roads, which certainly needs changed, however we have to legislate and plan based around the actions of some of our worst road users which is not limited to those driving motorised vehicles.

I am slightly staggered that a safety measure designed to protect the skull, brain and face is so vehemently opposed by those it would protect. In the overall context of road safety for cyclists, then compulsory wearing of a helmet is such low hanging fruit that it is virtually touching the ground. Any logistical problems with its implementation would I am sure be more readily overcome than turning central London’s infrastructure into Amsterdam!

Thats what he tweeted but what the beeb are reporting he said in the interview is very different.

anagallis_arvensis… bit stupid?

Form an opinion as you see fit

I am slightly staggered that a safety measure designed to protect the skull, brain and face is so vehemently opposed by those it would protect.

If there was a point you missed it.

Safety measures will never prevent all deaths, but it is no reason not to try.

In the light of the current obesity epidemic anything that makes a safe mode of travel seem to be risky by requiring safety equipment will lead to less people doing it and more people dying. Thats before we get onto the pollution aspect of car culture that kills so many in big cities. Or before we talk about the implications that compulsory helmet use may have on the way drivers percieve and respond to cyclists.

By all means use a helmet, I do, but know what its for. Its to protect my head if it hits a tree or the floor its not designed to protect against traffic

<p>

In the absence of anything extra it suggests here that its cycling thats crazy not the situation. I would be very happy to be proven wring if anyone has the original Times interview to hand

</p><p>So, all this vitriol and you haven’t actually read the original article.</p><p></p><p>Bravo. You know those gammon everyone likes to mock? Yeah, that’s right…</p>

Form an opinion as you see fit

Well your OP certainly is stupid seeing as it’s based on thinking ‘it’ means the same as ‘they’.

I don’t tend to call people stupid, it’s not nice but you set the tone for this thread.

Well your OP certainly is stupid seeing as it’s based on thinking ‘it’ means the same as ‘they’.

Could you explain that. I must be stupid. It could be cycling in London or the situation of cycling amongst traffic. It being done by the aforementioned they, the cyclists.

I am slightly staggered that a safety measure designed to protect the skull, brain and face is so vehemently opposed by those it would protect. In the overall context of road safety for cyclists, then compulsory wearing of a helmet is such low hanging fruit that it is virtually touching the ground.

Simple question for helmet advocates, do you wear one when walking and do you think they should be compulsory for pedestrians?

Such a low-hanging fruit in the overall context of road safety for pedestrians, after all….

Someone else already explained that upthread.

The it refers to cycling in london. You assumed he meant those doing were crazy but that’s your assumption, it doesn’t follow from his words.

https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/article/20171126-Chris-Boardman-0

He is what a non stupid person says about compulsory helmets.

Just heard bradley wiggins talking about this and Thomas,said he knows him pretty well and thinks he probably hasn’t given it much thought either way,more a case of him being the tour winner now and everyone jumps on everything he say’s because the general public and whiny **** that always need something to bleat about,well he said the first bit,rest is true though isn’t it .

he probably hasn’t given it much thought

Clearly

He is what a non stupid person says about compulsory helmets.

As opposed to what a stupid person says about an interview where only snippets have been quotes/misquoted and taken well out of context with a massive amount of reading what you want to see in them.

How do you know he’s been misquoted?

How do I know your not stupid?

How do I know your not stupid?

You dont, form an opinion as you see fit thats what I do.