Where's the pineapple? Mathieu van der Poel offends Italy AGAIN; 117mph driver "will need a bicycle"; Steep cobbled climbs: Yorkshire is the new Flanders; LEJOG with a difference; Giro rest day; Bollards!; Weekend round-up + more on the live blog

This was a side road that the pedestrians were crossing and this applies (e.g. from Cycling UK's explanations - they've a good video here too):

Rule H2 is linked to the hierarchy covered above and explains priority in practice. This includes expecting riders and drivers at junctions to give way:

“…to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.”
“… to pedestrians waiting to cross a zebra crossing, and to pedestrians and cyclists waiting to cross a parallel crossing.”

In this case there is a set-back for the crossing which is protective for crossing pedestrians as it gives them time to observe vehicles turning into the street and should ensure a 90 degree crossing angle.  Depending on the rest of the street this can of course reduce convenience for pedestrians (have to move away from the desire line).  I suspect in the UK this is as much for convenience of "flowing traffic" on the main road.  It also possibly doesn't work so well with cyclists and pedestrians here in that pedestrians will probably pause if they see a cyclists turning but the cyclist should (by new rules) wait for them so both lose momentum.  Which affects cyclists more than drivers.

chrisonatrike wrote:

This was a side road that the pedestrians were crossing and this applies (e.g. from Cycling UK's explanations - they've a good video here too):

Rule H2 is linked to the hierarchy covered above and explains priority in practice. This includes expecting riders and drivers at junctions to give way:

“…to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.”
“… to pedestrians waiting to cross a zebra crossing, and to pedestrians and cyclists waiting to cross a parallel crossing.”

In this case there is a set-back for the crossing which is protective for crossing pedestrians as it gives them time to observe vehicles turning into the street and should ensure a 90 degree crossing angle.  Depending on the rest of the street this can of course reduce convenience for pedestrians (have to move away from the desire line).  I suspect in the UK this is as much for convenience of "flowing traffic" on the main road.  It also possibly doesn't work so well with cyclists and pedestrians here in that pedestrians will probably pause if they see a cyclists turning but the cyclist should (by new rules) wait for them so both lose momentum.  Which affects cyclists more than drivers.

I just don't think that "give way" necessarily means "come to a stop" for bikes as even a single lane provides plenty of space for a pedestrian and a cyclist to both proceed. Cars would need to stop most of the time as they fill up a single lane.

I'm with you and what's actually needed in many (most?) cases is continuous footway * rather than a bit of Highway Code exhortation.  However as it stands that's going to be the default interpretation.  Even Cycling UK are putting that one out.

I'd be happy to accept some strictly unnecessary pausing for pedestrians on turns if it would encourage others in cars or almost all drivers understood this.  However the reality is that most pedestrians are rightly nervous of proceeding if they spot any turning traffic.  That means I'll be waiting and waving at them - which they may or may not respond to.  All that time I'll be in a position where I'm quite likely to be beeped at by drivers.  It's happened already.  Or worse - especially if there's a set-back crossing like in Ashley's video and I've turned in to the side street.

* In the UK at this point the response comes back "but we've not many side streets - they're mostly side roads e.g. carry lots of traffic".  Which only illustrates the problem we have with over-prioritising motor vehicles.  Oddly enough junctions with side roads also exist in other countries where they get this right.  And there they manage to work just fine.

Quite right. Happens often that people stop and wait as I'm approaching, where if they just crossed the road I could ride behind them without losing momentum.

They seem to forget that someone on a bike is nowhere near as wide as a car.

HarrogateSpa wrote:

Quite right. Happens often that people stop and wait as I'm approaching, where if they just crossed the road I could ride behind them without losing momentum.

They seem to forget that someone on a bike is nowhere near as wide as a car.

Luckily, cyclists don't usually carry much speed when turning into a side road, so it's usually more a case of will they be able to get across before I need to unclip.

I gave up about halfway but I don't think he mentioned that mikey focuses on that spot because of the collisions he is aware of from parks police and other cyclists complaining of the danger.

He really didn't listen at all when he was posting on here so I'm not going to give him any more clicks.

well its an interesting one isnt it, I cant help but feel its a video created to feed the youtube algorithm.

but do cyclists outside of the bubble on social media know who CyclingMikey is ? or what Gandalf corner is about ? (for ages not being a Londoner I genuinely thought that road was called Gandalf corner)  to claim he is influencing people seems a bit of a reach, and I dont follow CyclingMikeys videos regularly but the gandalf corner stuff is a small fraction of his output, he like the majority of cyclists simply collects alot of footage as part of normal rides, and you arent remotely creating these interactions and forcing it, they simply do just happen.

and you only see the relevant infraction parts of the video, not the rest of it thats probably completely unremarkable, that other cyclist video Ashley used who Im assuming wasnt CyclingMikey, I can almost guarantee that wont have been the first mobile phone user theyd seen that day, but by the time theyd got to that part of their ride, theyd had enough and were going to make a stand even if no one else was, and thats why they shouted, maybe that driver had close passed them and you catch up with them and they are mucking about on their phone.

and the bit about cyclists saying "youre on camera", is not a ha ha gotcha thing, its actually a necessary personal safety step for the cyclist, because Ive had several instances where drivers had closed passed me and then started to get stupidly agressive towards me when I caught up with them, and I point out Im recording them on camera, at which point Im covering myself from any legal mumbo jumbo get out they might claim about me secretly recording and provoking a confrontation, but they then mostly start to realise what they say and do next will have proper consequences, and it wont be my word against theirs no witnesses stuff, and most of them calm down, or at least do not escalate it further.

Yep, there was a bit of a 'cyclists, please suffer in silence' slant. This comment did make me chuckle though!...

To be fair, if I were Mikey, I wouldn't be gagging to cut short my European cycle tour just so I could stand around with a guy on a traffic island in London who is only going to try, and fail, to show me up by misrepresenting the content and entire point of my videos.

Quote:

My only question with what Mikey does at this particular corner is 'how many people have been convinced not to use a mobile phone because of what he does?'

I'm guessing not many, seeing as mobile phone use isn't really so much the issue here, as driving up the wrong side of the road.

Strange point for him to make. How many drivers have been convinced to address thier poor habbits because of what Ashley does? Judging by my cycle to work this morning - not many.

As long as Mikey is convincing some drivers not to use thier phone, then surely it's worth it?

Quote:

Strange point for him to make. How many drivers have been convinced to address thier poor habbits because of what Ashley does?

TBH, and he might address it elsewhere, but I think it is piss poor driving from a fully qualified instructor to talk into a camera whilst driving. Do one or the other mate.

but I bet Frank Lampard doesnt use hold his mobile phone whilst driving and drinking  perching a cup of coffee on the dashboard anymore...

I commented on the video as while some videos of his are very useful, his last one on cycling missed an awful lot (including his learner commiting an offence and him not being bothered) and this was horribly wide of the mark.

he thinks because a single survey ten years ago found that WHEN blame can be attributed the cyclist was to blame 1/3rd of the time for their own death, that means cycling and driving are equally risky. 

Link is broken (random space has crept on to the end of it).

Also, what's wrong with fish on a pizza?

mdavidford wrote:

Link is broken (random space has crept on to the end of it).

Also, what's wrong with fish on a pizza?

Corrected link: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/21/icelands-president-would-ban-pineapple-on-pizza-if-he-could

I used to live round the corner from a Jamaican Pizza cafe and they made a lovely ackee and saltfish one (fruit and fish!). Their sardine pizza was also really good.

There's nothing wrong with fish on a Pizza, but you would need to remove the cheese, I suppose, which wouldn't make it much of a Pizza. One of those Italian "golden rules" is no cheese with fish. 

How that squares with Anchovies, I don't know. You find those on Pizzas, and they're fish. Perhaps they're actually so foul, they're designated as chicken.

I once had a 'Pizza all Puttanesca' at an Italian restaurant, run by Italians, in Berlin. It was revolting tbh. Margheritas are just fine as they are.

One of those rare times that "tastes like chicken" really doesn't apply.  (I happen to like the anchovies and olives combo on occasion but I know I'm a minority.  Plus - crossing the streams here - a vote for curried fish too).

chrisonatrike wrote:

One of those rare times that "tastes like chicken" really doesn't apply.  (I happen to like the anchovies and olives combo on occasion but I know I'm a minority.  Plus - crossing the streams here - a vote for curried fish too).

I'm a big anchovy and olives fan, plus I enjoy curried fish. There's plenty of asian cuisines that have fish curries, so I don't think it's at all unusual. Also, what do Italians have against fish and cheese? A nice cod mornay or a even a smoked salmon and cream cheese bagel would demonstrate that fish and cheese do work together.

Well the insistence on cheese on a pizza is a bit of an imposition to start with - pizza without cheese is entirely normal in Italy.

mdavidford wrote:

Well the insistence on cheese on a pizza is a bit of an imposition to start with - pizza without cheese is entirely normal in Italy.

Yes, but then if someone offered me some Casu Marzu (https://www.cheese.com/casu-marzu/) I wouldn't want it on a pizza (or at all)

Now that's convenience food - let the lunch come to you!