Near Miss of the Day 30: VW Beetle driver almost left-hooks cyclist

spen wrote:

And what you fail to notice is that the standard of riding fell far below the standards you appear to expect of drivers.

 

If you want to be taken seriously then drop the acceptance of lower standards just because someones on a bike.

Couldn't agree more Spen.

Too many people focus solely on the deficiency of the driver (which was clear to see) but ignored the deficiency of the cyclists actions.  

Someone once told me that if you use a camera whilst driving or cycling your actions must be above reproach as the camera never lies.  And this is a prime example...showing that both parties involved could have acted better.

ChrisB200SX wrote:

The cyclist is in the single lane, well ahead of the car while the car is still in the right lane of two. The driver dangerously puts their car alongside the cyclist who is in the same lane, or prior to that, ahead of the car in the single lane.

Those of you defending the driver and berating the cyclist need to review your driving before you injure or kill a cyclist.

Surely those same posters defending the driver would have acted so blamelessly in this situation that they would have given way to the other road user, irrespective of whether they were driving the car or riding the bike.

Let's hope two of  these likeminded twerps never encounter each other in a similar  situation to this video or they are going to cause a lengthy hold up somewhere on our roads.

ChrisB200SX wrote:

The cyclist is in the single lane, well ahead of the car while the car is still in the right lane of two. The driver dangerously puts their car alongside the cyclist who is in the same lane, or prior to that, ahead of the car in the single lane.

Those of you defending the driver and berating the cyclist need to review your driving before you injure or kill a cyclist.

Chris, firstly being critical of the cyclists actions is not necessarily defending the driver.  

As I said right from the start the driver should have slowed down because they knew they were turning left at the junction but that does not excuse the cyclists poor cyclecraft.

The cyclist left it to the very end of their lane to merge in front of a car, which in they eyes of the law puts them at fault.  And then when it is clear that a vehicle has virtually overtaken you why would you decide to then continue to cycle up beside the car as they slow down to turn.

The cyclist should have either merged earlier when it was safe to do so, or to allow the car to complete its maneuver irrespective of how badly judged that maneuver was.  Because in an argument between 70 odd kg of cyclist and 1000+kg of car there can be only one victor.  Proving a point that the car drivers maneuver was ill conceived is of little comfort from a hospital bed.

In the ideal world the car should have slowed down, and been indicating so that the cyclist could see they were turning.  The cyclist should have been reading the road better and merge into the other lane about 20m sooner than they did, taking primary position at the pinch point to prevent such a reckless maneuver then we would all have been happy

Grumpy17 wrote:

Any competent driver with an ounce of common sense and a rudimentary ability to judge another road user's speed would have held back there. 

Sh*t judgement, sh*t driving.

 

And am sure the cyclist 'read the situation' perfectly well- he probably just realised here was another left -hooking tw*t with the IQ of a carrot.

Hmmm...... you obviously failed to notice the arrow on the road surface telling traffic to move to the right then , at around 7 seconds.  The rider should then have checked for traffic approaching from behind and, if necessary, and it was, gave way to traffic already in that lane before moving over to the right.  It appears that this rider didn't check for approaching traffic and appears to be unaware of the car until it's level with them.  Do that on a driving test and you'd probably fail.  

In this case the rider shows little understanding of how British roads work and was entirely responsible for the situation they found themselves in!

spen wrote:

Grumpy17 wrote:

Any competent driver with an ounce of common sense and a rudimentary ability to judge another road user's speed would have held back there. 

Sh*t judgement, sh*t driving.

 

And am sure the cyclist 'read the situation' perfectly well- he probably just realised here was another left -hooking tw*t with the IQ of a carrot.

 

Hmmm...... you obviously failed to notice the arrow on the road surface telling traffic to move to the right then , at around 7 seconds.  The rider should then have checked for traffic approaching from behind and, if necessary, and it was, gave way to traffic already in that lane before moving over to the right.  It appears that this rider didn't check for approaching traffic and appears to be unaware of the car until it's level with them.  Do that on a driving test and you'd probably fail.  

 

In this case the rider shows little understanding of how British roads work and was entirely responsible for the situation they found themselves in!

The cyclist gets to the merge arrow far sooner than the car, so the car should extend priority to the cyclist in the first place. A car in the same position would've moved across,  not just sat back and wait for other cars to pass first...

spen wrote:

Grumpy17 wrote:

Any competent driver with an ounce of common sense and a rudimentary ability to judge another road user's speed would have held back there. 

Sh*t judgement, sh*t driving.

 

And am sure the cyclist 'read the situation' perfectly well- he probably just realised here was another left -hooking tw*t with the IQ of a carrot.

 

Hmmm...... you obviously failed to notice the arrow on the road surface telling traffic to move to the right then , at around 7 seconds.  The rider should then have checked for traffic approaching from behind and, if necessary, and it was, gave way to traffic already in that lane before moving over to the right.  It appears that this rider didn't check for approaching traffic and appears to be unaware of the car until it's level with them.  Do that on a driving test and you'd probably fail.  

 

In this case the rider shows little understanding of how British roads work and was entirely responsible for the situation they found themselves in!

You obviously failed to notice you are talking utter bollox. Driving test? Wtf has that got to do with the price of fish? He's a cyclist holding his own in the urban jungle.He doesn't have to submit to a driving test, either a real one or an imaginary one conjured up by your pompous ego.

If you want to ride like some elderly spinster on a shopping bike feel free. But it's clear you are not a regular urban cyclist so don't give out advice on riding when you are clearly so inept at riding a bike yourself.

Grumpy17 wrote:

You obviously failed to notice you are talking utter bollox. Driving test? Wtf has that got to do with the price of fish? He's a cyclist holding his own in the urban jungle.He doesn't have to submit to a driving test, either a real one or an imaginary one conjured up by your pompous ego.

If you want to ride like some elderly spinster on a shopping bike feel free. But it's clear you are not a regular urban cyclist so don't give out advice on riding when you are clearly so inept at riding a bike yourself.

Living up to your name there Grumpy....

Just because you don't require to sit a driving test doesn't mean the rules of the road don't apply to you.

You would be the first to complain if the positions had been reversed, and the car merged in front of a cyclist who had priority you would have been berating the motorist for doing a dickish move.  And this is coming from someone who is a regular and adept urban cyclist.  

The drivel about "He's a cyclist holding his own in the urban jungle" with that you are just emphasising the "them and us" mentality shown by some cycilsts.  Share the road and live by the rules of the road.

craigstitt wrote:

Grumpy17 wrote:

You obviously failed to notice you are talking utter bollox. Driving test? Wtf has that got to do with the price of fish? He's a cyclist holding his own in the urban jungle.He doesn't have to submit to a driving test, either a real one or an imaginary one conjured up by your pompous ego.

If you want to ride like some elderly spinster on a shopping bike feel free. But it's clear you are not a regular urban cyclist so don't give out advice on riding when you are clearly so inept at riding a bike yourself.

Living up to your name there Grumpy....

Just because you don't require to sit a driving test doesn't mean the rules of the road don't apply to you.

You would be the first to complain if the positions had been reversed, and the car merged in front of a cyclist who had priority you would have been berating the motorist for doing a dickish move.  And this is coming from someone who is a regular and adept urban cyclist.  

The drivel about "He's a cyclist holding his own in the urban jungle" with that you are just emphasising the "them and us" mentality shown by some cycilsts.  Share the road and live by the rules of the road.

Lots of wrong assumptions  in your post. And too many posters on here trying to police the way other cyclists ride.Posters who are clearly less experienced at actually riding a bike than the people who they think they are qualified to  'educate'.

Grumpy17 wrote:

craigstitt wrote:

Grumpy17 wrote:

You obviously failed to notice you are talking utter bollox. Driving test? Wtf has that got to do with the price of fish? He's a cyclist holding his own in the urban jungle.He doesn't have to submit to a driving test, either a real one or an imaginary one conjured up by your pompous ego.

If you want to ride like some elderly spinster on a shopping bike feel free. But it's clear you are not a regular urban cyclist so don't give out advice on riding when you are clearly so inept at riding a bike yourself.

Living up to your name there Grumpy....

Just because you don't require to sit a driving test doesn't mean the rules of the road don't apply to you.

You would be the first to complain if the positions had been reversed, and the car merged in front of a cyclist who had priority you would have been berating the motorist for doing a dickish move.  And this is coming from someone who is a regular and adept urban cyclist.  

The drivel about "He's a cyclist holding his own in the urban jungle" with that you are just emphasising the "them and us" mentality shown by some cycilsts.  Share the road and live by the rules of the road.

 

Lots of wrong assumptions  in your post. And too many posters on here trying to police the way other cyclists ride.Posters who are clearly less experienced at actually riding a bike than the people who they think they are qualified to  'educate'.

Looks like I'm not the only one making assumptions as you are now berating people for being "clearly less experienced at actually riding a bike".  All of this based on a few typed words, when you can have no idea on how much experience those people have on riding bikes.

And seeing as the only assumptions I have made are about you...the rest were statements of fact, I could make the same rash assumption that you are clearly less experienced at actually riding a bike..........

And how do you know what the IQ of a carrot is? 

burtthebike wrote:

Keep these coming road.cc, some of us understand why you're doing it, and see the only problem as the petrolheads won't see them.  Actually, there is another problem: far too many people, even cyclists, seem to think that dangerous driving is acceptable and it doesn't matter how bad the driving is, it's still the cyclist's fault.

Agree, except the 'petrolhead' bit. Petrolheads I know (and I'm a bit of one myself) understand and respect cars and get their kicks on the track, not from driving like a twat near vulnerable road users.

davel wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

Keep these coming road.cc, some of us understand why you're doing it, and see the only problem as the petrolheads won't see them.  Actually, there is another problem: far too many people, even cyclists, seem to think that dangerous driving is acceptable and it doesn't matter how bad the driving is, it's still the cyclist's fault.

Agree, except the 'petrolhead' bit. Petrolheads I know (and I'm a bit of one myself) understand and respect cars and get their kicks on the track, not from driving like a twat near vulnerable road users.

Seconded, but there are also some dickhead boy/girl-racers who use the roads as a racetrack and treat cyclists as mobile chicanes.

craigstitt wrote:

Looking at that I think there is blame on both parts but IMHO the majority of the blame lies with the cyclist. Some of the blame lies with the car, because they committed to an overtake that they could not finish before they then had to slow down to then turn into the junction.

You're going to have to explain how the cyclist has any responsibility for that incident.  The driver, not the car, attempted to overtake and turn left at the same time.  They are a cretin and should be spit roast on a traffic island somewhere as a warning to others.

burtthebike wrote:

craigstitt wrote:

Looking at that I think there is blame on both parts but IMHO the majority of the blame lies with the cyclist. Some of the blame lies with the car, because they committed to an overtake that they could not finish before they then had to slow down to then turn into the junction.

You're going to have to explain how the cyclist has any responsibility for that incident.  The driver, not the car, attempted to overtake and turn left at the same time.  They are a cretin and should be spit roast on a traffic island somewhere as a warning to others.

last time I checked burtthebike if you are merging into a lane where there is other traffic you have to check to make sure that it is safe to merge before you begin your maneuver.  The cyclist was in a lane which ended, then proceeded to try and merge when it was not safe to do so.  

Try rule 133 of the highway code.....

If you need to change lane, first use your mirrors and if necessary take a quick sideways glance to make sure you will not force another road user to change course or speed. When it is safe to do so, signal to indicate your intentions to other road users and when clear, move over.

That sufficient explanation for you burt?

If the cyclist was to be blameless they should have read the road better and merged into the lane sooner.... e.g. taking primary position at a pinch point, or they should have slowed down and let the car pass.

craigstitt wrote:

If the cyclist was to be blameless they should have read the road better and merged into the lane sooner.... e.g. taking primary position at a pinch point, or they should have slowed down and let the car pass.

Fair enough: I'm sure that it would have been far better to have moved over to take primary and then have that VW sitting a foot behind your rear wheel hooting its horn (as I suspect would have happened had the cyclist moved over as soon as there was the 'merge' arrow).

OTOH, just where did the VW think that the cyclist was going to go?  The VW had come up behind the cyclist on the dualled section of road, then had literally just passed them at the pinch-point, so they were (presumably?) fully aware that they were there, so why did they then try to left-hook them?  Why didn't the VW hold back before the pinch point and then safely turn left? (I know I would have, in that situation).

As so many people say on this site: the HC and the RTA may say one thing - and I concede that the cyclist could have handled the situation better - but sometimes we all just need to get along and that VW was not getting along, but MGIFing instead.  With great power (kinetic energy, mass, etc) comes great responsibility, and that VW driver really didn't demonstrate any of that.

Mungecrundle wrote:

Can't say I'd do any different to the cyclist there, except to give the car a quick boot on the way past.

Oh yes. One thing we know is that a pile of. Flesh on a bike is invulnerable against a tonne of metal. Awesome attitude. You'll live long.

Mungecrundle wrote:

Can't say I'd do any different to the cyclist there, except to give the car a quick boot on the way past.

I'm considering getting my design for steel-toe-capped cycle shoes crowdfunded.  There's got to be a market.  Possibly with luxury additions like extendable spikes.