Cyclist v Motorist that's actually worth watching

ChumLee

Stoke wrote: »

You can't post that. It's illegal for anything negative to be said about cyclists!!!!

I'll just take a leaf out of custardys book and fail to accept any wrong doing. :rotfl:

prowla

ChumLee wrote: »

Just to keep it balanced.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/watch-the-moment-angry-cyclist-falls-off-bike-after-swearing-at-passing-driver-10311649.html

That's funny!

Retrogamer

Stoke wrote: »

I see, next time I think someones about to steal my stuff, I'll just !!!!ing drive down the pavement shall I?

Sure, why not.

ChumLee wrote: »

Just to keep it balanced.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/watch-the-moment-angry-cyclist-falls-off-bike-after-swearing-at-passing-driver-10311649.html

That one was hilarious.

I seen this one today for some of the people posting here that probably get annoyed when cyclists don't use cycling lanes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbUkjLkEOhE

Strider590

ChumLee wrote: »

Just to keep it balanced.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/watch-the-moment-angry-cyclist-falls-off-bike-after-swearing-at-passing-driver-10311649.html

I do have to question why the driver was trying to overtake two cyclists through a pinch point barely wide enough for a car, why he couldn't see that one cyclist was travelling faster than the other and why therefore he was surprised by the one overtaking the other.

ChumLee

Strider590 wrote: »

I do have to question why the driver was trying to overtake two cyclists through a pinch point barely wide enough for a car, why he couldn't see that one cyclist was travelling faster than the other and why therefore he was surprised by the one overtaking the other.

Well track him down and ask him, unless he's a member you won't get an answer.

Retrogamer

Strider590 wrote: »

I do have to question why the driver was trying to overtake two cyclists through a pinch point barely wide enough for a car, why he couldn't see that one cyclist was travelling faster than the other and why therefore he was surprised by the one overtaking the other.

If the cyclist had stayed in the cycling lane at the pinch point, the car would have been able to pass safely.

The cyclist pulled out though without even checking over his shoulder to see if anything was there. Obviously there was.

The lifesaver check is to benefit himself. The car looks to have beeped to let the cyclist aware of his presence as presumable if the cyclist had known the car was there, they wouldn't have pulled out in front of hit.

Johno100

Retrogamer wrote: »

If the cyclist had stayed in the cycling lane at the pinch point, the car would have been able to pass safely.

The cyclist pulled out though without even checking over his shoulder to see if anything was there. Obviously there was.

The lifesaver check is to benefit himself. The car looks to have beeped to let the cyclist aware of his presence as presumable if the cyclist had known the car was there, they wouldn't have pulled out in front of hit.

I totally agree with your assessment.

Regrettable that the cyclist demonstrated the all too common 'chip on the shoulder' attitude of many cyclists and took the beep of the horn as an admonishment (illegal) as opposed to a warning by the driver of his presence (a legitimate use of the horn).

ChumLee

Johno100 wrote: »

I totally agree with your assessment.

Regrettable that the cyclist demonstrated the all too common 'chip on the shoulder' attitude of many cyclists and took the beep of the horn as an admonishment (illegal) as opposed to a warning by the driver of his presence (a legitimate use of the horn).

And what a brilliant ending because of it.

RichardD1970

Have to agree with Retrogamer (and to some extent Johno100 :eek:) on this one.

Car_54

Johno100 wrote: »

I totally agree with your assessment.

Regrettable that the cyclist demonstrated the all too common 'chip on the shoulder' attitude of many cyclists and took the beep of the horn as an admonishment (illegal) as opposed to a warning by the driver of his presence (a legitimate use of the horn).

Which law is that then?