The hierarchy on the road?

Regardless of what ever the highway code is, you should be courteous and friendly to all road users. Drivers, Cyclists, Horse riders, Runners, Ramblers, Walkers. How can you be expected to be treated fairly if you don't treat others the same way! Runners shouldn't stick to pavements no less than Horse riders should stick to bridleways.

Don't certain cyclists see that there own intolerance to other road users is the same problem that drivers have with cyclists.

Whether or not a rule, law or code I was always taught to walk against the flow of traffic on a road, something to do with being able to see the cars and being able to move of the road if necessary (or to look the person about to run you down in the eyes)

You sound like ignorant drivers talking about cyclists

I have often wondered why runners run on the road rather than an empty pavement and force other road users to move out of their way. Motorists who get annoyed at having to go around a cyclist seem quite happy to have to avoid runners going against the flow of traffic. Could a runner give me a reason why they run on the road? And "Because we can" is not a valid reason.

Dave is correct about rights - pedestrians have priority over everyone, it's an inverted hierarchy of priority. Car drivers do NOT have a right of way over other road users. Most of them conveniently forget this and assume the roads are made for them, so are happy to bully those more vulnerable.

It's difficult to comment without seeing photos but if this runner was far enough out into the road to deliberately cause an issue for other traffic AND nearly ran into a group of people looking the other way I'd suggest he is an arse and needs to learn some manners. The same would apply to a cyclist or any other road user.

highway code wrote:

Pavements (including any path along the side of a road) should be used if provided. Where possible, avoid being next to the kerb with your back to the traffic. If you have to step into the road, look both ways first. Always show due care and consideration for others.

it's a 'should' rather than a MUST, so it's not compulsory. Technically people on foot have a right of way on all roads excepting motorways. the wording is similar to the wording that DfT were *going* to use for cycle paths before everyone kicked up a stink about that. One of the main reasons was because many people thought it would allow insurance companies to claim contributory negligence more easily.

It should be common sense, regardless of the what the law says, if the law said it was ok to cycle in outside lane of the m25 I still wouldn't do it because I know at some point it would end in tears.

I've come around a bend in a car before to find runners two abreast running towards me, I was perhaps doing 40mph (with plenty of time to stop, the verge was too rough for them to continue running, my only option was to either come to a halt or to move completely over to the other side of the road, neither of which IMO I should've been put in a position in to do so.