This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Made me laugh, those poor people in Surrey
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-24077383
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-24077383
In reply to dale1968: I love the hard of thinking assumption that people riding wont be drivers and that they're all offcomers.
In reply to lummox:
Nimby w*nkers. In a just world people who sign this sort of petition would be rounded up and crucified.
jcm
Nimby w*nkers. In a just world people who sign this sort of petition would be rounded up and crucified.
jcm
In reply to dale1968:
From the report:
"The route chosen is all enclosing and no provision has been made for vehicular crossing points. So to facilitate a bike ride many Surrey residents are to be confined to their homes from 5am until 9pm.
If that's the case then surely they have a point?
From the report:
"The route chosen is all enclosing and no provision has been made for vehicular crossing points. So to facilitate a bike ride many Surrey residents are to be confined to their homes from 5am until 9pm.
If that's the case then surely they have a point?
In reply to Removed User:
If that was the case, obviously it's not,It's not a curfew, they could walk or even ride a bike!
> (In reply to Removed Userdale1968)
>
> From the report:
>
fresidents are to be confined to their homes from 5am until 9pm.>
> From the report:
>
>
> If that's the case then surely they have a point?
> If that's the case then surely they have a point?
If that was the case, obviously it's not,It's not a curfew, they could walk or even ride a bike!
In reply to Removed User:
>If that's the case then surely they have a point?
Yes, but presumably, on the basis that that which is totally improbable and contained in a political statement is generally not true, it isn't.
jcm
>If that's the case then surely they have a point?
Yes, but presumably, on the basis that that which is totally improbable and contained in a political statement is generally not true, it isn't.
jcm
In reply to Removed User:
It didn't take much looking for, but I found one...
This from a Mr Richard Doran of Tadworth - Hugely congested roads made worse by cyclists, who pay no road taxes and continually break the law. Many accidents will ensue.
It didn't take much looking for, but I found one...
This from a Mr Richard Doran of Tadworth - Hugely congested roads made worse by cyclists, who pay no road taxes and continually break the law. Many accidents will ensue.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
http://www.surreycommunity.info/surrey2012/tour-of-britain/road-closures-2/
"The vast majority of the race route is delivered under a temporary rolling road closure, enforced by police and the National Escort Group... [i]n practice roads may be closed between 10 minutes and half an hour, depending on the terrain, weather and race location."
No point letting the truth interfere with a good moan, though, is there?
http://www.surreycommunity.info/surrey2012/tour-of-britain/road-closures-2/
"The vast majority of the race route is delivered under a temporary rolling road closure, enforced by police and the National Escort Group... [i]n practice roads may be closed between 10 minutes and half an hour, depending on the terrain, weather and race location."
No point letting the truth interfere with a good moan, though, is there?
it'll fade, the peak was the olympics and it will fade a lot more now, maybe one or two annually in the future but i cant see the number of races being high going forward. It could be worse they could live near wembley stadium or twickenham.
In reply to dale1968:
And if one were to play angry rant bingo with this diatribe, then it's a full house! See how many comments we've all heard before rear their head in this...
We are sick to the back teeth of these arrogant, road hogging lycra louts. The scale of arrogance demonstrated by most of these lyrca clad bullies has to be seen to be believed. We are no longer able to walk our dogs at a wood in East Horsley because we have twice come back to our vehicle to find road bikes lent all over it. The arrogant riders seemed indignant- how dare I not let them lean their stupid bikes on my car. They are cyclists, the new Gods of the road. Twice we have met a bunch of them literally stopped across the highway; and again the anger they showed when we asked them to move was staggering. How dare we ask them to move, they are cyclists- the new Gods of the road. While I write it is also worth pointing out that on numerous occasions the lycra louts have dismounted next to me while I got the dogs in the car and urinated right in front of me. They have no shame. What is staggering is the fact that this bunch of yobs is actually encouraged, like a spoilt child at its mother's side, by the Government and Surrey County Council. The reason given for the road closures- loose terminology like "economic benefits" and "health benefits". The rationale behind the road closures patronisingly suggests that all this nonsense will inspire the residents of Surrey to be healthier and be more active. Do they assume we are all unhealthy and inactive, and that the only way to get healthy is to ride a bike dressed in skin tight- all -too revealing lycra? What about having a nice walk? A horse ride? A run? Skateboarding? BMX biking? Roller skating? Nope, sorry you cant do those things anymore they are NOT road cycling and therefore are not part of the new religion. How dare anyone tell me I need to be healthier! I am a free person and will be as healthy as I wish. And do the council really think that a family would like to go out cycling on the roads with the lycra louts playing Tour-de- France make believe, racing each other and the clock like that is all that matters? Once an occasional cyclist myself, I would not want to be anywhere near the lycra bunch on the roads. Is it not true that the new cycling fad does not include families on ordinary bikes amongst its members? Where are the families and kids out on bikes? They would be scoffed at or worse, run off the road by the lycra -clad racing set out on another sportive. Let us not forget that road racing is an activity where some of the very icons of the sport are slowly being revealed as doped up and drug enhanced "athletes". Is this a sport to aspire to at all? Road cycling in Surrey has become somewhat like a cult; it is closed off, it is angry in defence of itself and believes, because of its eco-friendly credentials, that it is out to save humanity. Reading the comments on some of the cycling forums many of them are glad we have been forced off the road and even scoffed when elderly residents on Box Hill said they felt intimated by the number of cyclists there. Who are these cyclists to judge the feelings of the elderly, the very people we should all hold with great regard and do our best to support and care for? It is not fair on local businesses to close roads on their busy days- they have a right to be open and earn a living. They need to in order to survive. What are the "economic benefits" of these races, and if there are any, to whom do they belong? Certainly not businesses closed on the route. This madness must stop; the roads and public spaces are for everybody, and the needs of some should not outweigh the needs of others. Let non-cyclists go about their law abiding business in peace- we have every right to do so EVERY day of the year.
And if one were to play angry rant bingo with this diatribe, then it's a full house! See how many comments we've all heard before rear their head in this...
We are sick to the back teeth of these arrogant, road hogging lycra louts. The scale of arrogance demonstrated by most of these lyrca clad bullies has to be seen to be believed. We are no longer able to walk our dogs at a wood in East Horsley because we have twice come back to our vehicle to find road bikes lent all over it. The arrogant riders seemed indignant- how dare I not let them lean their stupid bikes on my car. They are cyclists, the new Gods of the road. Twice we have met a bunch of them literally stopped across the highway; and again the anger they showed when we asked them to move was staggering. How dare we ask them to move, they are cyclists- the new Gods of the road. While I write it is also worth pointing out that on numerous occasions the lycra louts have dismounted next to me while I got the dogs in the car and urinated right in front of me. They have no shame. What is staggering is the fact that this bunch of yobs is actually encouraged, like a spoilt child at its mother's side, by the Government and Surrey County Council. The reason given for the road closures- loose terminology like "economic benefits" and "health benefits". The rationale behind the road closures patronisingly suggests that all this nonsense will inspire the residents of Surrey to be healthier and be more active. Do they assume we are all unhealthy and inactive, and that the only way to get healthy is to ride a bike dressed in skin tight- all -too revealing lycra? What about having a nice walk? A horse ride? A run? Skateboarding? BMX biking? Roller skating? Nope, sorry you cant do those things anymore they are NOT road cycling and therefore are not part of the new religion. How dare anyone tell me I need to be healthier! I am a free person and will be as healthy as I wish. And do the council really think that a family would like to go out cycling on the roads with the lycra louts playing Tour-de- France make believe, racing each other and the clock like that is all that matters? Once an occasional cyclist myself, I would not want to be anywhere near the lycra bunch on the roads. Is it not true that the new cycling fad does not include families on ordinary bikes amongst its members? Where are the families and kids out on bikes? They would be scoffed at or worse, run off the road by the lycra -clad racing set out on another sportive. Let us not forget that road racing is an activity where some of the very icons of the sport are slowly being revealed as doped up and drug enhanced "athletes". Is this a sport to aspire to at all? Road cycling in Surrey has become somewhat like a cult; it is closed off, it is angry in defence of itself and believes, because of its eco-friendly credentials, that it is out to save humanity. Reading the comments on some of the cycling forums many of them are glad we have been forced off the road and even scoffed when elderly residents on Box Hill said they felt intimated by the number of cyclists there. Who are these cyclists to judge the feelings of the elderly, the very people we should all hold with great regard and do our best to support and care for? It is not fair on local businesses to close roads on their busy days- they have a right to be open and earn a living. They need to in order to survive. What are the "economic benefits" of these races, and if there are any, to whom do they belong? Certainly not businesses closed on the route. This madness must stop; the roads and public spaces are for everybody, and the needs of some should not outweigh the needs of others. Let non-cyclists go about their law abiding business in peace- we have every right to do so EVERY day of the year.
In reply to Ramblin dave:
I imagine the 9-5 closures probably referred to Ride London.
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
> http://www.surreycommunity.info/surrey2012/tour-of-britain/road-closures-2/
>
> "The vast majority of the race route is delivered under a temporary rolling road closure, enforced by police and the National Escort Group... [i]n practice roads may be closed between 10 minutes and half an hour, depending on the terrain, weather and race location."
>
> No point letting the truth interfere with a good moan, though, is there?
> http://www.surreycommunity.info/surrey2012/tour-of-britain/road-closures-2/
>
> "The vast majority of the race route is delivered under a temporary rolling road closure, enforced by police and the National Escort Group... [i]n practice roads may be closed between 10 minutes and half an hour, depending on the terrain, weather and race location."
>
> No point letting the truth interfere with a good moan, though, is there?
I imagine the 9-5 closures probably referred to Ride London.
In reply to Tony the Blade: Fantastic!
In reply to Tony the Blade: that's got to be Simon4's Surrey based relative's rant ; )
In reply to dale1968:
You'll notice if you read the entire thing that only 1400 people have signed the petition and many more have entered the races...
Says it all really.
The rant further up is amazing however.
You'll notice if you read the entire thing that only 1400 people have signed the petition and many more have entered the races...
Says it all really.
The rant further up is amazing however.
In reply to TomBaker:
> (In reply to dale1968)
> You'll notice if you read the entire thing that only 1400 people have signed the petition and many more have entered the races...
>
It took a petition of four to do for the open air concerts at Kenwood on Hampstead Heath. > You'll notice if you read the entire thing that only 1400 people have signed the petition and many more have entered the races...
>
In reply to Tony the Blade: Baaah those bloody lycra louts! But surely s/he forgot to mention that they are avid road tax dodgers?
Not much of a cyclist myself, I totally sympathize with the very balanced objections of this very rational person.
"all-too revealing lycra" is very well put. Won't somebody please think of the children?
Not much of a cyclist myself, I totally sympathize with the very balanced objections of this very rational person.
"all-too revealing lycra" is very well put. Won't somebody please think of the children?
In reply to drolex:
> But surely s/he forgot to mention that they are avid road tax dodgers?
>
Oh there were plenty of those comments made by others! >
In reply to Removed User:
Sounds a bit like the Edinburgh Marathon. When we lived at Meadowbank (Royal Park Terr) we had to leave very early to go hillwalking on the day otherwise the car would have been locked in until too late. If it was once a month I could see their point. But once a year?
Sounds a bit like the Edinburgh Marathon. When we lived at Meadowbank (Royal Park Terr) we had to leave very early to go hillwalking on the day otherwise the car would have been locked in until too late. If it was once a month I could see their point. But once a year?
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
> (In reply to lummox)
>
> Nimby w*nkers. In a just world people who sign this sort of petition would be rounded up and crucified.
>
Can we have a standing ovation for this comment? >
> Nimby w*nkers. In a just world people who sign this sort of petition would be rounded up and crucified.
>
In reply to Toby S: I've just wasted a few minutes reading through the petition supporter's comments. How do people get through life being such astounding f*cktards as to think that cycle = no payee taxee ?
In reply to lummox:
Yes, you wonder how they muster the co-ordination needed to type and foam at the mouth at the same time, don't you?
jcm
Yes, you wonder how they muster the co-ordination needed to type and foam at the mouth at the same time, don't you?
jcm
In reply to lummox:
I guess their point is that a Tax Disc (Vehicle License) is vehicle related, not person related.
Car drivers are paying for a tax disc to use their motorised vehicle on a road.
Cyclists are not paying for a tax disc to use their 'vehicle' on the road.
So not relevant to their argument whether, as a cyclist, you also pay for a tax disc to use your motorised vehicle on a road.
And as for road runners ..... get a tax disc for those feet
I guess their point is that a Tax Disc (Vehicle License) is vehicle related, not person related.
Car drivers are paying for a tax disc to use their motorised vehicle on a road.
Cyclists are not paying for a tax disc to use their 'vehicle' on the road.
So not relevant to their argument whether, as a cyclist, you also pay for a tax disc to use your motorised vehicle on a road.
And as for road runners ..... get a tax disc for those feet
In reply to ChrisJD:
And don't get me started on tax-dodging horse riders who seem to imagine they can use the roads.....
jcm
And don't get me started on tax-dodging horse riders who seem to imagine they can use the roads.....
jcm
In reply to ChrisJD:
As the tax disk is for owning the Vechicle and effectively now actually a tax on them poisioning the rest of us their argument is plainly flawed on a number of levels.
As the tax disk is for owning the Vechicle and effectively now actually a tax on them poisioning the rest of us their argument is plainly flawed on a number of levels.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously: where's Simon4 when you need some spittle powered vitriol ?!!??
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Too right, a Tax Disc on each hoof I reckon.
> (In reply to ChrisJD)
>
> And don't get me started on tax-dodging horse riders who seem to imagine they can use the roads.....
>
> And don't get me started on tax-dodging horse riders who seem to imagine they can use the roads.....
Too right, a Tax Disc on each hoof I reckon.
In reply to TomBaker:
Err no. I own a van that is SORN and do not need a tax disk.
> As the tax disk is for owning the Vechicle
Err no. I own a van that is SORN and do not need a tax disk.
In reply to ChrisJD: owners of old cars and others exempt from VED shouldn't be on the roads either- bastards !
In reply to dale1968:
You laugh now, but when they decide to get rid of all the cyclists and crusty jugglers it won't be so funny...
For the greater good.
You laugh now, but when they decide to get rid of all the cyclists and crusty jugglers it won't be so funny...
For the greater good.
In reply to lummox: And as for those eco cars that don't pay anything, get them off the road. We want proper polluting vehicles that pay loads!
In reply to lummox:
It's an outrage .... I shall start a petition. They should be exempt from being exempt.
> (In reply to ChrisJD) owners of old cars and others exempt from VED shouldn't be on the roads either- bastards !
It's an outrage .... I shall start a petition. They should be exempt from being exempt.
In reply to davidbeynon:
You'll laugh when the oil runs out.
> (In reply to dale1968)
>
> You laugh now, but when they decide to get rid of all the cyclists and crusty jugglers it won't be so funny...
>
> For the greater good.
>
> You laugh now, but when they decide to get rid of all the cyclists and crusty jugglers it won't be so funny...
>
> For the greater good.
You'll laugh when the oil runs out.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
And I've yet to see someone clear any horse shit up off the road, thereby inconveniencing everyone else - think of the poor children!
Actually, I feel this is a big issue. If I allow my dog to shit on the road and walk away I'd quite rightly be called at best a yob/chav/knobhead etc, yet a horse (which leaves a sizeable chunk of shit) can do it without the owner/rider giving a toss and it's socially accepted.
So get off your high horse and clean up after yourselves!
And I've yet to see someone clear any horse shit up off the road, thereby inconveniencing everyone else - think of the poor children!
Actually, I feel this is a big issue. If I allow my dog to shit on the road and walk away I'd quite rightly be called at best a yob/chav/knobhead etc, yet a horse (which leaves a sizeable chunk of shit) can do it without the owner/rider giving a toss and it's socially accepted.
So get off your high horse and clean up after yourselves!
In reply to Tony the Blade:
Would a low horse like a Shetland Pony (insert other low breed names here) be excluded?
> So get off your high horse and clean up after yourselves!
Would a low horse like a Shetland Pony (insert other low breed names here) be excluded?
In reply to Tony the Blade: And those arrogant horses with their arrogant arrogance, you can see every single detail of their anatomy too!
In reply to ChrisJD:
If rather than picking bits of my post and you quoted the entire thing you'd have noticed that i observed that its now actually a tax on emmisions as your van is SORN then its not polluting and therefore not taxed.
If rather than picking bits of my post and you quoted the entire thing you'd have noticed that i observed that its now actually a tax on emmisions as your van is SORN then its not polluting and therefore not taxed.
In reply to ChrisJD:
Yes, provided you have a soapbox to stand on instead.
> (In reply to Tony the Blade)
>
> [...]
>
> Would a low horse like a Shetland Pony (insert other low breed names here) be excluded?
>
> [...]
>
> Would a low horse like a Shetland Pony (insert other low breed names here) be excluded?
Yes, provided you have a soapbox to stand on instead.
In reply to drolex:
Damn right, bloody arrogancers!
> (In reply to Tony the Blade) And those arrogant horses with their arrogant arrogance, you can see every single detail of their anatomy too!
Damn right, bloody arrogancers!
In reply to TomBaker:
Where did I say its not being driven? I just said it was SORN (not driven on a public road).
> (In reply to ChrisJD)
> If rather than picking bits of my post and you quoted the entire thing you'd have noticed that i observed that its now actually a tax on emmisions as your van is SORN then its not polluting and therefore not taxed.
> If rather than picking bits of my post and you quoted the entire thing you'd have noticed that i observed that its now actually a tax on emmisions as your van is SORN then its not polluting and therefore not taxed.
Where did I say its not being driven? I just said it was SORN (not driven on a public road).
In reply to Tony the Blade:
Always useful to carry one
> Yes, provided you have a soapbox to stand on instead.
Always useful to carry one
In reply to Tony the Blade:
Horse shit and dog shit are two entirely different substances but if you ever feel the need to dig dog shit in around your roses I'm sure we can arrange for a few bags of the stuff to be delivered
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> > Actually, I feel this is a big issue. If I allow my dog to shit on the road and walk away I'd quite rightly be called at best a yob/chav/knobhead etc, yet a horse (which leaves a sizeable chunk of shit) can do it without the owner/rider giving a toss and it's socially accepted.
>
>
> > Actually, I feel this is a big issue. If I allow my dog to shit on the road and walk away I'd quite rightly be called at best a yob/chav/knobhead etc, yet a horse (which leaves a sizeable chunk of shit) can do it without the owner/rider giving a toss and it's socially accepted.
>
Horse shit and dog shit are two entirely different substances but if you ever feel the need to dig dog shit in around your roses I'm sure we can arrange for a few bags of the stuff to be delivered
In reply to Removed User:
Yes, I agree, I never feel the horseshit point is very powerful. Usually brought out by those who have either never stepped in dog shit or never stepped in horse shit.
jcm
Yes, I agree, I never feel the horseshit point is very powerful. Usually brought out by those who have either never stepped in dog shit or never stepped in horse shit.
jcm
In reply to Removed User:
Neither's very nice to have trodden into your carpet though, is it? And we have far more horse shit and cow shit on the roads round us than dog shit, and I can tell you that my wife delivers entirely equivalent bollockings for walking any of them into the house.
> (In reply to Removed UserTony the Blade)
> [...]
>
>
> Horse shit and dog shit are two entirely different substances but if you ever feel the need to dig dog shit in around your roses I'm sure we can arrange for a few bags of the stuff to be delivered
> [...]
>
>
> Horse shit and dog shit are two entirely different substances but if you ever feel the need to dig dog shit in around your roses I'm sure we can arrange for a few bags of the stuff to be delivered
Neither's very nice to have trodden into your carpet though, is it? And we have far more horse shit and cow shit on the roads round us than dog shit, and I can tell you that my wife delivers entirely equivalent bollockings for walking any of them into the house.
In reply to Removed User:
Are they? In what way? I know that I don't particularly enjoy cycling through either.
Of course I wouldn't want to dig dog shit into my roses (ew, the mere thought!), but horse shit is, well, shit... isn't it?
> (In reply to Removed UserTony the Blade)
> [...]
>
>
> Horse shit and dog shit are two entirely different substances
> [...]
>
>
> Horse shit and dog shit are two entirely different substances
Are they? In what way? I know that I don't particularly enjoy cycling through either.
Of course I wouldn't want to dig dog shit into my roses (ew, the mere thought!), but horse shit is, well, shit... isn't it?
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
> (In reply to Minneconjou Sioux)
>
> Yes, I agree, I never feel the horseshit point is very powerful. Usually brought out by those who have either never stepped in dog shit or never stepped in horse shit.
>
I used to hunt, so have plenty of experience of stepping in both. >
> Yes, I agree, I never feel the horseshit point is very powerful. Usually brought out by those who have either never stepped in dog shit or never stepped in horse shit.
>
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Now you're being silly, who is this person who has allegedly never stepped in dog shit
> (In reply to Minneconjou Sioux)
>
> Yes, I agree, I never feel the horseshit point is very powerful. Usually brought out by those who have either never stepped in dog shit or never stepped in horse shit.
>
> jcm
>
> Yes, I agree, I never feel the horseshit point is very powerful. Usually brought out by those who have either never stepped in dog shit or never stepped in horse shit.
>
> jcm
Now you're being silly, who is this person who has allegedly never stepped in dog shit
In reply to andy:
You have options. Get a new wife, take your shoes off before walking on your carpets or get a more practical wipe clean floor covering. Personally I prefer the last option, carpets are a filthy unhygienic habit
> (In reply to Minneconjou Sioux)
> [...]
>
> Neither's very nice to have trodden into your carpet though, is it? And we have far more horse shit and cow shit on the roads round us than dog shit, and I can tell you that my wife delivers entirely equivalent bollockings for walking any of them into the house.
> [...]
>
> Neither's very nice to have trodden into your carpet though, is it? And we have far more horse shit and cow shit on the roads round us than dog shit, and I can tell you that my wife delivers entirely equivalent bollockings for walking any of them into the house.
You have options. Get a new wife, take your shoes off before walking on your carpets or get a more practical wipe clean floor covering. Personally I prefer the last option, carpets are a filthy unhygienic habit
In reply to ChrisJD:
Well, not those ones who have such low emissions that their tax disc is free...
https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables
> Car drivers are paying for a tax disc to use their motorised vehicle on a road.
Well, not those ones who have such low emissions that their tax disc is free...
https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables
In reply to Tony the Blade:
Hound shit is far worse than your average dog shit, hounds should be made to wear nappies
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
> [...]
> I used to hunt, so have plenty of experience of stepping in both.
> [...]
> I used to hunt, so have plenty of experience of stepping in both.
Hound shit is far worse than your average dog shit, hounds should be made to wear nappies
In reply to timjones:
My Springers (Rocky and Rambo - an indicator of how long ago this was) used to get thrown in the river before heading back, and they didn't live in the house. Their shed and run stank nearly as much as the ferret hutch!
> (In reply to Tony the Blade)
> [...]
>
> Hound shit is far worse than your average dog shit, hounds should be made to wear nappies
> [...]
>
> Hound shit is far worse than your average dog shit, hounds should be made to wear nappies
My Springers (Rocky and Rambo - an indicator of how long ago this was) used to get thrown in the river before heading back, and they didn't live in the house. Their shed and run stank nearly as much as the ferret hutch!
In reply to tlm:
See 15:46
> Well, not those ones who have such low emissions that their tax disc is free...
>
> https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables
>
> https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables
See 15:46
In reply to ChrisJD:
"And he bought fine linen, and took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulchre which was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre."
What's that got to do with the price of fish?
> See 15:46
"And he bought fine linen, and took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulchre which was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre."
What's that got to do with the price of fish?
In reply to Ramblin dave:
Fair enough, it looks like we're dealing with the lunatic fringe of the Daily Mail reading UKIP voters then.
I wouldn't think there's much to worry about though. They're too polite in Surrey to scatter nails and broken glass over the road.
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
> http://www.surreycommunity.info/surrey2012/tour-of-britain/road-closures-2/
>
> "The vast majority of the race route is delivered under a temporary rolling road closure, enforced by police and the National Escort Group... [i]n practice roads may be closed between 10 minutes and half an hour, depending on the terrain, weather and race location."
>
> No point letting the truth interfere with a good moan, though, is there?
> http://www.surreycommunity.info/surrey2012/tour-of-britain/road-closures-2/
>
> "The vast majority of the race route is delivered under a temporary rolling road closure, enforced by police and the National Escort Group... [i]n practice roads may be closed between 10 minutes and half an hour, depending on the terrain, weather and race location."
>
> No point letting the truth interfere with a good moan, though, is there?
Fair enough, it looks like we're dealing with the lunatic fringe of the Daily Mail reading UKIP voters then.
I wouldn't think there's much to worry about though. They're too polite in Surrey to scatter nails and broken glass over the road.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
They must be using a toughbook or some other form of waterproof keyboard as well to deal with the froth spraying over it.
> Yes, you wonder how they muster the co-ordination needed to type and foam at the mouth at the same time, don't you?
They must be using a toughbook or some other form of waterproof keyboard as well to deal with the froth spraying over it.
In reply to Tony the Blade: Having been on my first (and probably only) club ride a couple of weeks ago I actually have some sympathy with the author of that tirade. Am I the only one who thinks it's quite reasonable? (please don't shout at me).
Fact is the roads are just to overcrowded in this country. I dearly hope at some point we start looking at a cycling only network. That's something I'd quite happily pay a bit of cycleway tax for.
Fact is the roads are just to overcrowded in this country. I dearly hope at some point we start looking at a cycling only network. That's something I'd quite happily pay a bit of cycleway tax for.
In reply to Tony the Blade:
Shouldn't cat owners be made to pay an up front Cat Tax for all the shit they leave lying around in other peoples gardens?
> (In reply to johncoxmysteriously)
>
> And I've yet to see someone clear any horse shit up off the road, thereby inconveniencing everyone else - think of the poor children!
>
> Actually, I feel this is a big issue. If I allow my dog to shit on the road and walk away I'd quite rightly be called at best a yob/chav/knobhead etc, yet a horse (which leaves a sizeable chunk of shit) can do it without the owner/rider giving a toss and it's socially accepted.
>
> So get off your high horse and clean up after yourselves!
>
> And I've yet to see someone clear any horse shit up off the road, thereby inconveniencing everyone else - think of the poor children!
>
> Actually, I feel this is a big issue. If I allow my dog to shit on the road and walk away I'd quite rightly be called at best a yob/chav/knobhead etc, yet a horse (which leaves a sizeable chunk of shit) can do it without the owner/rider giving a toss and it's socially accepted.
>
> So get off your high horse and clean up after yourselves!
Shouldn't cat owners be made to pay an up front Cat Tax for all the shit they leave lying around in other peoples gardens?
In reply to drolex:
It's true, of all the above, that is offensive.
> "all-too revealing lycra" is very well put. Won't somebody please think of the children?
It's true, of all the above, that is offensive.
In reply to Trevers:
Reading some of the comments in the petition to keep up the same spirit they should simply be shot.
Whether thats the owner, the cat or both is negotiable.
> Shouldn't cat owners be made to pay an up front Cat Tax for all the shit they leave lying around in other peoples gardens?
Reading some of the comments in the petition to keep up the same spirit they should simply be shot.
Whether thats the owner, the cat or both is negotiable.
In reply to dale1968:
This might be the utopian model they have in mind
http://road.cc/content/news/94079-three-year-old-banned-riding-dagenham-hou...
This might be the utopian model they have in mind
http://road.cc/content/news/94079-three-year-old-banned-riding-dagenham-hou...
In reply to FrankBooth:
"The association said it had instituted a “no balls or bikes” policy after complaints from residents who believed their homes and cars could be damaged by children playing outside."
Presumably it's the aforementioned association that has no balls?
> (In reply to dale1968)
> This might be the utopian model they have in mind
> http://road.cc/content/news/94079-three-year-old-banned-riding-dagenham-hou...
> This might be the utopian model they have in mind
> http://road.cc/content/news/94079-three-year-old-banned-riding-dagenham-hou...
"The association said it had instituted a “no balls or bikes” policy after complaints from residents who believed their homes and cars could be damaged by children playing outside."
Presumably it's the aforementioned association that has no balls?
In reply to Trevers:
I regularly feel intimidated by aggressive and dangerous behaviour from the cyclists and also where motorists are fed up of being stuck behind large groups of cyclists they take more risks when encountering horses on the roads. This is going to end in someone having a serious accident.
Those horrible cyclists, making drivers overtake horses badly!
I regularly feel intimidated by aggressive and dangerous behaviour from the cyclists and also where motorists are fed up of being stuck behind large groups of cyclists they take more risks when encountering horses on the roads. This is going to end in someone having a serious accident.
Those horrible cyclists, making drivers overtake horses badly!
In reply to dale1968:
Exactly
> (In reply to Eric9Points)
>
> If that was the case, obviously it's not,It's not a curfew, they could walk or even ride a bike!
> If that was the case, obviously it's not,It's not a curfew, they could walk or even ride a bike!
Exactly
In reply to Skip:
Actually, reading the comments, it sounds like there is some kind full blown cycling insurgency going on down there. Rival cycling gangs having indiscriminate gunfights in the streets, swerving dangerously around potholes, holding residents hostage in their own homes, demanding protection money and worst of all, refusing to pay their taxes.
God forbid.
> (In reply to dale1968)
> [...]
>
> [...]
>
> Exactly
> [...]
>
> [...]
>
> Exactly
Actually, reading the comments, it sounds like there is some kind full blown cycling insurgency going on down there. Rival cycling gangs having indiscriminate gunfights in the streets, swerving dangerously around potholes, holding residents hostage in their own homes, demanding protection money and worst of all, refusing to pay their taxes.
God forbid.
In reply to shaun l:
I sort of agree, and recognise some of that cyclist behaviour (in others of course !).
The all day road closures seem to be a sort of a "final straw", and it's the large numbers of cyclists in the Surrey Hills area that seem to be the main annoyance, so why can't they alternate the Pru 100 with other counties in future years if it's going to be an annual fixture ?
I realise signatories should be required to cycle a few laps of the 100 route (preferably when there's a lot of traffic) to make sure they have an objective view on cycling, but I wonder if there was a similar craze for pony and traps whether cyclists who drive might be happy to sign a similar petition.
I see Chris Hoy has signed up.
> I actually have some sympathy with the author of that tirade. Am I the only one who thinks it's quite reasonable? (please don't shout at me).
I sort of agree, and recognise some of that cyclist behaviour (in others of course !).
The all day road closures seem to be a sort of a "final straw", and it's the large numbers of cyclists in the Surrey Hills area that seem to be the main annoyance, so why can't they alternate the Pru 100 with other counties in future years if it's going to be an annual fixture ?
I realise signatories should be required to cycle a few laps of the 100 route (preferably when there's a lot of traffic) to make sure they have an objective view on cycling, but I wonder if there was a similar craze for pony and traps whether cyclists who drive might be happy to sign a similar petition.
I see Chris Hoy has signed up.
It probably doesn't help public opinon that there was an event last weekend. No road closures, but a lot of road useage.
In reply to dale1968:
Playing Devil's Advocate here but if racing cars/motorbikes on a public highway is an offence then why isn't racing bicycles? Cars/motorcycles go to dedicated race tracks, so why not bicycles? It might remove alot of the them and us mentality between motorists and cyclists, and cyclists and pedestrians. Although roads are closed for pedestrian racing ie marathons and half marathons, which causes major inconvenience to local people.
I suppose it's a matter of live and let live, but in the case of club cycle racing it can be quite frequent and disruptive to other traffic.
Playing Devil's Advocate here but if racing cars/motorbikes on a public highway is an offence then why isn't racing bicycles? Cars/motorcycles go to dedicated race tracks, so why not bicycles? It might remove alot of the them and us mentality between motorists and cyclists, and cyclists and pedestrians. Although roads are closed for pedestrian racing ie marathons and half marathons, which causes major inconvenience to local people.
I suppose it's a matter of live and let live, but in the case of club cycle racing it can be quite frequent and disruptive to other traffic.
In reply to Trangia:
>Playing Devil's Advocate here but if racing cars/motorbikes on a public highway is an offence then why isn't racing bicycles?
I'll take a wild guess that the answer is connected to the greater propensity of cars that are being raced to kill people when they leave the track.
jcm
>Playing Devil's Advocate here but if racing cars/motorbikes on a public highway is an offence then why isn't racing bicycles?
I'll take a wild guess that the answer is connected to the greater propensity of cars that are being raced to kill people when they leave the track.
jcm
In reply to Trangia:
Assuming the competitors comply with the law then afaik you can race cars to your heart's content - but it wouldn't be much of a race as you'd be complying with speed limits etc.
Actually lots of/most bike races are done on closed circuits, but the difference with a "proper" road is you get the variety of terrain, which as bikes are people powered makes a massive difference - look at the ToB stage through the Lakes - Honister Pass, then a blast along a fast road and then a steep finishing climb - most closed circuit races are settled with a sprint as you can't get away from the group.
I'm not aware of any club races on closed roads. If you mean Sportives I think there are four closed road events per year in the UK, all in different areas, plus the ToB and some town centre races like the Otley races, where the circuit is maybe a mile and a half long and not very hard to get round.
> (In reply to dale1968)
>
> Playing Devil's Advocate here but if racing cars/motorbikes on a public highway is an offence then why isn't racing bicycles?
>
> Playing Devil's Advocate here but if racing cars/motorbikes on a public highway is an offence then why isn't racing bicycles?
Assuming the competitors comply with the law then afaik you can race cars to your heart's content - but it wouldn't be much of a race as you'd be complying with speed limits etc.
Actually lots of/most bike races are done on closed circuits, but the difference with a "proper" road is you get the variety of terrain, which as bikes are people powered makes a massive difference - look at the ToB stage through the Lakes - Honister Pass, then a blast along a fast road and then a steep finishing climb - most closed circuit races are settled with a sprint as you can't get away from the group.
>
> I suppose it's a matter of live and let live, but in the case of club cycle racing it can be quite frequent and disruptive to other traffic.
> I suppose it's a matter of live and let live, but in the case of club cycle racing it can be quite frequent and disruptive to other traffic.
I'm not aware of any club races on closed roads. If you mean Sportives I think there are four closed road events per year in the UK, all in different areas, plus the ToB and some town centre races like the Otley races, where the circuit is maybe a mile and a half long and not very hard to get round.
In reply to Trangia:
They do, I have raced at Thruxton, Castle Combe, and others.
It's called road racing for a reason,that's why they take place on public roads.
Racing bikes on public roads is very different to a motor vehicle.I am sure you don't need me to explain the subtle difference
> (In reply to dale1968)
>Cars/motorcycles go to dedicated race tracks, so why not bicycles? They do, I have raced at Thruxton, Castle Combe, and others.
It's called road racing for a reason,that's why they take place on public roads.
Racing bikes on public roads is very different to a motor vehicle.I am sure you don't need me to explain the subtle difference
In reply to andy:
And of course, the Otley race is a great focus for the town and welcomed pretty universally by residents and business people.
> (In reply to Trangia)
> [...]
>
some town centre races like the Otley races, where the circuit is maybe a mile and a half long and not very hard to get round.> [...]
>
And of course, the Otley race is a great focus for the town and welcomed pretty universally by residents and business people.
In reply to lummox:
Indeed - packed town centre on a Wednesday night.
> (In reply to andy)
> [...]
> some town centre races like the Otley races, where the circuit is maybe a mile and a half long and not very hard to get round.
>
> And of course, the Otley race is a great focus for the town and welcomed pretty universally by residents and business people.
> [...]
> some town centre races like the Otley races, where the circuit is maybe a mile and a half long and not very hard to get round.
>
> And of course, the Otley race is a great focus for the town and welcomed pretty universally by residents and business people.
Indeed - packed town centre on a Wednesday night.
In reply to shaun l:
You are of course absolutely right. But please tell me why you somehow think the answer to overcrowded roads is fewer bikes (and therefore more cars)?
> Fact is the roads are just to overcrowded in this country.
You are of course absolutely right. But please tell me why you somehow think the answer to overcrowded roads is fewer bikes (and therefore more cars)?
In reply to yorkshireman:
To be fair, in the context of club runs and on-road bike races, we're not really talking about bike rides that replace car journeys.
The question is more whether inconveniencing other people through directly recreational use of the roads - such as going out for a ride with your cycling club - is somehow less acceptable than doing it through indirectly recreational use of the roads - such as driving to the peak district to go climbing or your local town to go to the cinema or the garden centre to look at some decking or whatever along with everyone else and helping to create a traffic jam.
To be fair, in the context of club runs and on-road bike races, we're not really talking about bike rides that replace car journeys.
The question is more whether inconveniencing other people through directly recreational use of the roads - such as going out for a ride with your cycling club - is somehow less acceptable than doing it through indirectly recreational use of the roads - such as driving to the peak district to go climbing or your local town to go to the cinema or the garden centre to look at some decking or whatever along with everyone else and helping to create a traffic jam.
In reply to dale1968:
dale1968 is just so right; Hit by a racing motor vehicle, you die. Hit by a racing bike, you are merely crippled. Do try and keep up Trangia.
> (In reply to Trangia)
> Racing bikes on public roads is very different to a motor vehicle.I am sure you don't need me to explain the subtle difference
> Racing bikes on public roads is very different to a motor vehicle.I am sure you don't need me to explain the subtle difference
dale1968 is just so right; Hit by a racing motor vehicle, you die. Hit by a racing bike, you are merely crippled. Do try and keep up Trangia.
In reply to Ramblin dave:
Well yes and of course inconveniencing affects all other road users, not just those who are using the road for indirect recreational purposes.
Well yes and of course inconveniencing affects all other road users, not just those who are using the road for indirect recreational purposes.
In reply to silhouette:
That and there is a subtle difference in speed which alters the risk somewhat.
> dale1968 is just so right; Hit by a racing motor vehicle, you die. Hit by a racing bike, you are merely crippled.
That and there is a subtle difference in speed which alters the risk somewhat.
In reply to yorkshireman: I just said I had some sympathy, the last thing I want is fewer bikes and more cars. Was surprised at the vitriol on the thread to what seemed like reasonable complaints to me. Unless the recent cycling craze it's a fad, which I doubt, conflict between drivers and riders can only get worse. I think we need a major reinvestment in infrastructure. This article explains what I'm getting at.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2011/jun/03/cycling-study-...
Instead of taking the piss out of these people perhaps we could concede that it is a problem and talk about solutions. I'd like to see drivers and cyclists united in lobbying the government for a better cycling infrastructure.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2011/jun/03/cycling-study-...
Instead of taking the piss out of these people perhaps we could concede that it is a problem and talk about solutions. I'd like to see drivers and cyclists united in lobbying the government for a better cycling infrastructure.
In reply to Tony the Blade:
One is essentially digested grass and the other is digested meat from dubious sources with additional dog biscuits etc with equally dubious ingredients. On a level of toxicity I'd guess horse shit at 1 vs dog shit at 9.
> (In reply to Minneconjou Sioux)
> [...]
>
> Are they? In what way? I know that I don't particularly enjoy cycling through either.
>
> Of course I wouldn't want to dig dog shit into my roses (ew, the mere thought!), but horse shit is, well, shit... isn't it?
> [...]
>
> Are they? In what way? I know that I don't particularly enjoy cycling through either.
>
> Of course I wouldn't want to dig dog shit into my roses (ew, the mere thought!), but horse shit is, well, shit... isn't it?
One is essentially digested grass and the other is digested meat from dubious sources with additional dog biscuits etc with equally dubious ingredients. On a level of toxicity I'd guess horse shit at 1 vs dog shit at 9.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...