Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Near Miss of the Day 341: Close pass followed by not so seasonal greeting

Our regular series featuring close passes from around the country - today it's Berkshire...

The latest video in our Near Miss of the Day series shows a motorist making a close pass on cyclists in Berkshire – then given them some less-than-seasonal cheer when they pointed out how his driving had put them in danger.

It was filmed this morning in Eton by road.cc reader Lyndon, who told us:  “It was a wet morning and many parts of the road were a bit flooded, and when moving towards the centre of the road to avoid standing water our group of three was passed quite closely.

“The driver proceeded to drive into the centre of Eton, where at the set of lights we tried to explain the behaviour was dangerous. The man just swore at us and we carried on down Eton High Street.

“Going over some of the humps, he passed me quite closely, only to brake and turn into a church car park.

“I followed along with the others, again telling the man that passing so closely is dangerous.

“Now I'm a proud Canadian, and as most will know, we don't take kindly to being mistaken for Americans, but I've never been called South African or Australian,” Lyndon said, adding, “Clearly he didn't do well in Geography lessons, or on his driving test."

> Near Miss of the Day turns 100 - Why do we do the feature and what have we learnt from it?

Over the years road.cc has reported on literally hundreds of close passes and near misses involving badly driven vehicles from every corner of the country – so many, in fact, that we’ve decided to turn the phenomenon into a regular feature on the site. One day hopefully we will run out of close passes and near misses to report on, but until that happy day arrives, Near Miss of the Day will keep rolling on.

If you’ve caught on camera a close encounter of the uncomfortable kind with another road user that you’d like to share with the wider cycling community please send it to us at info [at] road.cc or send us a message via the road.cc Facebook page.

If the video is on YouTube, please send us a link, if not we can add any footage you supply to our YouTube channel as an unlisted video (so it won't show up on searches).

Please also let us know whether you contacted the police and if so what their reaction was, as well as the reaction of the vehicle operator if it was a bus, lorry or van with company markings etc.

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

23 comments

Avatar
crazy-legs | 5 years ago
0 likes

Arguing isn't going to solve anything, it's not like he was going to admit to being in the wrong.

No, you just wait until he's in the church then let his tyres down (you can't actually be done for criminal damage if you just let them down via the valve cos you've not technically damaged anything - if you slash them then yes, that's criminal damage!)

Avatar
Hirsute | 5 years ago
0 likes

Given there are signs for a Surgery and Health Centre, the driver may have no church connection at all.

Avatar
OldRidgeback | 5 years ago
0 likes

So, the driver's not a Christian but he does seem a bit of a Berkshire hunt.

Avatar
PRSboy | 5 years ago
0 likes

Were I confronted by another road user who politely informed me that my driving had bothered them sufficiently that they followed me to let me know, I would be mortified and apologise, rather than being offensive.

Evidently we were all raised differently.

Avatar
roubaixcobbles replied to PRSboy | 5 years ago
1 like

PRSboy wrote:

Were I confronted by another road user who politely informed me that my driving had bothered them sufficiently that they followed me to let me know, I would be mortified and apologise, rather than being offensive.

Evidently we were all raised differently.

 

Even if you knew you'd done nothing wrong (not the case in this example)? I was followed a couple of weekends ago by a posh couple in a 4x4 who caught me at some lights and complained that I had delayed them making their right turn by not signalling my intention to turn left as I approached a junction; clearly my riding had bothered them sufficiently for them to follow me to let me know, but as I knew I had made not one but three clear hand signals as I approached the junction, the last only completed when I returned my hand to the bars to make the turn, I wasn't mortified and certainly didn't apologise.

Avatar
PRSboy replied to roubaixcobbles | 5 years ago
0 likes

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

PRSboy wrote:

Were I confronted by another road user who politely informed me that my driving had bothered them sufficiently that they followed me to let me know, I would be mortified and apologise, rather than being offensive.

Evidently we were all raised differently.

 

Even if you knew you'd done nothing wrong (not the case in this example)? I was followed a couple of weekends ago by a posh couple in a 4x4 who caught me at some lights and complained that I had delayed them making their right turn by not signalling my intention to turn left as I approached a junction; clearly my riding had bothered them sufficiently for them to follow me to let me know, but as I knew I had made not one but three clear hand signals as I approached the junction, the last only completed when I returned my hand to the bars to make the turn, I wasn't mortified and certainly didn't apologise.

Fair point... I meant alarmed or frightened another road user sufficiently for them to want to have words.

 

Avatar
Shades replied to roubaixcobbles | 5 years ago
0 likes

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

PRSboy wrote:

Were I confronted by another road user who politely informed me that my driving had bothered them sufficiently that they followed me to let me know, I would be mortified and apologise, rather than being offensive.

Evidently we were all raised differently.

 

Even if you knew you'd done nothing wrong (not the case in this example)? I was followed a couple of weekends ago by a posh couple in a 4x4 who caught me at some lights and complained that I had delayed them making their right turn by not signalling my intention to turn left as I approached a junction; clearly my riding had bothered them sufficiently for them to follow me to let me know, but as I knew I had made not one but three clear hand signals as I approached the junction, the last only completed when I returned my hand to the bars to make the turn, I wasn't mortified and certainly didn't apologise.

4x4 - your 'chariot' when you ascend to the highest state of self-entitlement!

Avatar
Shades | 5 years ago
2 likes

Wouldn't have bothered confronting a driver over that; bit on the close side but pretty slow.  Keep going and you'd have forgotten about it; the subsequent argument would have 'wound me up' more than the close pass.  Take a more 'primary' position if the road's narrow and you don't want to be overtaken.

Avatar
Philh68 replied to Shades | 5 years ago
1 like

Shades wrote:

Wouldn't have bothered confronting a driver over that; bit on the close side but pretty slow.  Keep going and you'd have forgotten about it; the subsequent argument would have 'wound me up' more than the close pass.  Take a more 'primary' position if the road's narrow and you don't want to be overtaken.

reading the description it sounds like there was more than one incident with this driver, a close pass when the group was moving to primary to avoid standing water and then after attempting to engage the driver, subsequent close passes before the car park encounter. Would have been better if the footage showed all of the encounter.

Avatar
Awavey replied to Philh68 | 5 years ago
0 likes
Philh68 wrote:

Shades wrote:

Wouldn't have bothered confronting a driver over that; bit on the close side but pretty slow.  Keep going and you'd have forgotten about it; the subsequent argument would have 'wound me up' more than the close pass.  Take a more 'primary' position if the road's narrow and you don't want to be overtaken.

reading the description it sounds like there was more than one incident with this driver, a close pass when the group was moving to primary to avoid standing water and then after attempting to engage the driver, subsequent close passes before the car park encounter. Would have been better if the footage showed all of the encounter.

Yeah I wondered about that,as by itself that '2nd' encounter,while I dispute that ride prime stops that stuff, is fairly atypical and not worth confronting anyone over imo

Avatar
Philh68 | 5 years ago
1 like

Who mistakes a Canadian for an Australian? Canadians are polite and don’t talk like they’ve been to the swear word buffet!

If it had been an Aussie, it would have sounded like this: “you f*n dumb c*t, are your f*n eyes painted on you stupid w*nker! Learn how to drive you f*kwit!” And that’s when they’re just mildly annoyed… you should hear them when they’re really fired up!

Avatar
roadmanshaq | 5 years ago
2 likes

You can get ready to hear much more of shit like this as of this Thursday's news.

Avatar
Kendalred replied to roadmanshaq | 5 years ago
1 like

roadmanshaq wrote:

You can get ready to hear much more of shit like this as of this Thursday's news.

Ah yes, the resurgance of the wonderful phrase 'fuck off back to...'

To be honest, I doubt that the events of the last few days, months and years has meant that more people have become xenophobic or racist, it's just that those idiots feel far more emboldened to express it openly. It doesn't help that the leader of our nation and the 'leader of the free world' are both complicit.

Avatar
124g | 5 years ago
1 like

What a cock

 

Avatar
racyrich | 5 years ago
1 like

Good work overcoming the temptation to either chin the cowson or take his keys.

Avatar
Hirsute | 5 years ago
0 likes

MGIF

Avatar
grumpyoldcyclist | 5 years ago
6 likes

Ahhh, perhaps he's a christian showing us all how to behave in a festive christian manner. Sounds like a fine fellow judging from his comments bringing nationality into it. #onlyonaSunday

Avatar
Sriracha replied to grumpyoldcyclist | 5 years ago
1 like
grumpyoldcyclist wrote:

Ahhh, perhaps he's a christian showing us all how to behave in a festive christian manner. Sounds like a fine fellow judging from his comments bringing nationality into it. #onlyonaSunday

So prejudice based on nationality is bad, but based on religion is ok?

Avatar
Stuk replied to Sriracha | 5 years ago
0 likes

Sriracha wrote:
grumpyoldcyclist wrote:

Ahhh, perhaps he's a christian showing us all how to behave in a festive christian manner. Sounds like a fine fellow judging from his comments bringing nationality into it. #onlyonaSunday

So prejudice based on nationality is bad, but based on religion is ok?

 

That’s not prejudice, it’s sarcasm. Christianity is about how you act towards others not the religious buildings that you attend.

Avatar
Simon E replied to Sriracha | 5 years ago
1 like

Sriracha wrote:

So prejudice based on nationality is bad, but based on religion is ok?

No it's highlighting the hypocrisy.

One of Jesus's 2 great commandments: "Love thy neighbour as thyself."

from Wikipedia: Most Christian denominations consider these two commandments to be the core of correct Christian lifestyle.

Could be paraphrased as "Treat others as you wish to be treated yourself".

Unfortunately too many people who go to church or claim to be Christians do not think or behave this way; some act in a particularly un-Christian manner. And that's not conjecture or n=1, it's based on growing up as the child of a clergyman, surrounded by churchgoers and 'men (and latterly women) of the cloth'. Most of them are thoroughly decent but some, well...

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Simon E | 5 years ago
1 like

Simon E wrote:

Sriracha wrote:

So prejudice based on nationality is bad, but based on religion is ok?

No it's highlighting the hypocrisy.

One of Jesus's 2 great commandments: "Love thy neighbour as thyself."

from Wikipedia: Most Christian denominations consider these two commandments to be the core of correct Christian lifestyle.

Could be paraphrased as "Treat others as you wish to be treated yourself".

Unfortunately too many people who go to church or claim to be Christians do not think or behave this way; some act in a particularly un-Christian manner. And that's not conjecture or n=1, it's based on growing up as the child of a clergyman, surrounded by churchgoers and 'men (and latterly women) of the cloth'. Most of them are thoroughly decent but some, well...

I thought that the "Christian God" was somewhat prejudiced against other religions - "Worship no other gods before me" etc.

Also, I think the Christian heaven is discriminatory - if you're not a Christian, you're not getting in.

Meanwhile, Cthulhu welcomes all into his abode/stomach - no discrimination there.

 

Avatar
Simon E replied to hawkinspeter | 5 years ago
0 likes

hawkinspeter wrote:

I thought that the "Christian God" was somewhat prejudiced against other religions - "Worship no other gods before me" etc.

Also, I think the Christian heaven is discriminatory - if you're not a Christian, you're not getting in.

It's a standard recruitment tactic - you aren't allowed in if you don't keep up your subscription. And it's why the post-death alternative to heaven is painted as pretty awful.

Cathedrals don't get built or deep clerical pockets lined without lots of money flowing in. For a long time the C of E was the country's largest landowner, and not the most benevolent one at that. Its historical financial status is why most Rectories are significant buildings, with huge rooms, grand driveways and located in upmarket areas. Most clerics didn't mix with the poor and needy but socialised with the landed gentry and often had servants until the early/mid 20th century.

I'm pretty sure that "Worship no other gods before me" is an Old Testament line. And it doesn't say not to worship them at all, just not in preference to Yahweh/Jehovah. Multiple gods were widespread in those times.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Simon E | 5 years ago
0 likes

Simon E wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

I thought that the "Christian God" was somewhat prejudiced against other religions - "Worship no other gods before me" etc.

Also, I think the Christian heaven is discriminatory - if you're not a Christian, you're not getting in.

It's a standard recruitment tactic - you aren't allowed in if you don't keep up your subscription. And it's why the post-death alternative to heaven is painted as pretty awful.

Cathedrals don't get built or deep clerical pockets lined without lots of money flowing in. For a long time the C of E was the country's largest landowner, and not the most benevolent one at that. Its historical financial status is why most Rectories are significant buildings, with huge rooms, grand driveways and located in upmarket areas. Most clerics didn't mix with the poor and needy but socialised with the landed gentry and often had servants until the early/mid 20th century.

I'm pretty sure that "Worship no other gods before me" is an Old Testament line. And it doesn't say not to worship them at all, just not in preference to Yahweh/Jehovah. Multiple gods were widespread in those times.

It seems like they're trying a bit too hard.

Now with the Elder Gods, they pretty much already own all of Earth and they don't really care if we worship them or not. To my mind, it's like if ants started worshipping us - we just wouldn't care.

Latest Comments