Why cyclists get a bad name

[Richard Frost]

This maybe of interest https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62444889

[macliam]

Yes, it's one of the differences, plus, of course, cyclists might be prosecuted for being under the influence.... but they can hardly lose their license, can they?

Most cyclists never do anything to warrant such penalties.... but then, neither do most drivers. Those who do should be liable under the law. Cyclists are certainly more vulnerable than drivers, but the same applies to cyclists and pedestrians - what is required is a recognition of others, not because they have "rights", but as other road users.

Unless, of course, someone can argue why it is OK for everyone to be constrained to travelling at the speed of the slowest cyclist - and if so, should we do away with pavements and just allow pedestrians to walk where they like in the road?

[Chadwick]

An individual cyclist on a country road is rarely an irritant, but a group of a dozen, jockeying for position, coasting or riding very slowly on roads where there are very limited chances to pass, is a PITA - and it is becoming more common these days. It is a rare trip out in my rural area where I don't end up following a gaggle of bicycles at some point.

Conversely, many cyclists on country roads find an individual car to rarely be an irritant, but a group of a dozen, jockeying for position, speeding or driving aggressively on roads where there are limited chances to pass is a PITA, and occasionally fatal.


There are many different types of road user. On country roads there are pedestrians, equestrians, cyclists, farm vehicles, caravans, mopeds, light goods vehicles, buses and drivers that are lost or nervous in narrow roads. Livestock or wild animals can sometimes be present. Car drivers must take all that into account. Once you get onto busier roads, the car is king and most other traffic is kept out of the car driver's way, either through extra lanes or voluntarily.

As a cyclist, if you want to limit your risk of an accident, cycle on the quieter roads.
As a car driver, if you wish to drive as fast as possible, drive on the main roads.

Unless, of course, someone can argue why it is OK for everyone to be constrained to travelling at the speed of the slowest cyclist

Because the road is narrow, or visibility is poor and it is not safe to overtake.

[macliam]

An individual cyclist on a country road is rarely an irritant, but a group of a dozen, jockeying for position, coasting or riding very slowly on roads where there are very limited chances to pass, is a PITA - and it is becoming more common these days. It is a rare trip out in my rural area where I don't end up following a gaggle of bicycles at some point.

Conversely, many cyclists on country roads find an individual car to rarely be an irritant, but a group of a dozen, jockeying for position, speeding or driving aggressively on roads where there are limited chances to pass is a PITA, and occasionally fatal.


There are many different types of road user. On country roads there are pedestrians, equestrians, cyclists, farm vehicles, caravans, mopeds, light goods vehicles, buses and drivers that are lost or nervous in narrow roads. Livestock or wild animals can sometimes be present. Car drivers must take all that into account. Once you get onto busier roads, the car is king and most other traffic is kept out of the car driver's way, either through extra lanes or voluntarily.

As a cyclist, if you want to limit your risk of an accident, cycle on the quieter roads.
As a car driver, if you wish to drive as fast as possible, drive on the main roads.

Nope, an invalid response. Horse riders, pedestrians and even the individual cyclist is really not an issue, it is the groups or leisure cyclists that cause a problem. I live in the country, I need to use local roads to move from A to B, it is not a pleasure ride for me, as I drive only when necessary and there are limited "main roads" (although actually the country roads I am talking about are B roads, not country lanes). Unlike those who live in the cities annd who have access to public transport and regular, subsidised travel, I have very limited public transport which takes many times longer because it uses circuitous routes to maximise passenger pickups. I can travel to the nearest town and from there to Ipswich (if lucky, on the same bus). So car travel is a necessity - my dentist is 12 miles away on country roads, my doctor is 3 miles away, ditto.

What I am complaining about is not the "need for speed", but the ability to drive on a restricted road at anything near to normal speeds - rather than being forced to a crawl behind people who are using the road as a recreational activity and who show no consideration for those who might not wish to dawdle along chatting to their friends and enjoying the country air.

Unless, of course, someone can argue why it is OK for everyone to be constrained to travelling at the speed of the slowest cyclist

Because the road is narrow, or visibility is poor and it is not safe to overtake.

No, because these cyclists are restricting everyone to their speed, obviously. Otherwise there would be hundreds of accidents a day.

[blythburgh]

I always give a cyclist a wide berth whatever road I am on. But it does get up my nose when they go slowly in a group meaning I cannot get past even when I could give one cyclist a wide berth, And if farm vehicles can pull over when possible to give the cars behind a chance to go at a reasonable speed why can't cyclists?

And I bet I get up the noses of cars behind me at times as I tuck in behind a cyclist rather than try and overtake and drive close to the cyclist because the my secton of the road is too narrow to give a wide berth.

[blythburgh]

And I know Macliam land and he has my sympathies when it comes to public transport and selfish cyclists

[pabenny]

What I am complaining about is not the "need for speed", but the ability to drive on a restricted road at anything near to normal speeds.

I think actually what you're saying is that your rights as a car driver should override those of cyclists.

You mention consideration of others...some people*, some of the time are rude, thoughtless or inconsiderate. That doesn't mean all people* are rude, thoughtless or inconsiderate all of the time.

* substitute with cyclists, car drivers, old people, young people, etc.

[macliam]

What I am complaining about is not the "need for speed", but the ability to drive on a restricted road at anything near to normal speeds.

I think actually what you're saying is that your rights as a car driver should override those of cyclists.

You mention consideration of others...some people*, some of the time are rude, thoughtless or inconsiderate. That doesn't mean all people* are rude, thoughtless or inconsiderate all of the time.

* substitute with cyclists, car drivers, old people, young people, etc.

You seem very keen to put words into my mouth and claim things I haven't said... perhaps you'd be better adressing the actual points made. I have been very clear about those who I blame for the situation..... whereas you have been at pains to suggest everyone else under the sun.... mostly drivers, it seems. To be crystal, I call out those groups of cyclists, who ride for leisure and do not consider other road users..... it is rare for anyone else to cause a similar problem.

[Chadwick]

Obviously we can't ask drivers to just wait until there is a safe opportunity to pass. No, other people must make allowances for car drivers.
Perhaps they could widen the roads to account for the needs of all road users? Or ban leisure cycling?

[macliam]

I'll leave you to crawl in a queue of traffic for 25 minutes caused only by a large group of cyclists who were either utterly unaware of the queue of cars behind them or just didn't care. Not a thought in their heads to look back, let alone pull in. Because, of course, obstructing the free flow of traffic is clearly recommended in the highway code, isn't it...

I was actually surprised that the drivers were as calm as they were...... but 'm sure you'd be only too happy to leave half an hour earlier on a half-hour journey just so the lycra mob can get their jollies.... or perhaps I should only drive in the rain - because there never seems to be a problem then.....

Maybe there should be a limit to the number of cyclists allowed to group together without prior authorisation (to allow for official road races, etc.) and some training for road awareness in those situations. That way the number of groups using particular routes could be monitored.... because there have been as many as 5 groups in a 10-mile stretch of road before now.