Another cycling article - this time The Sunday Times

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Cab

New Member
Location
Cambridge
brokenbetty said:
Really? In other threads you've made the point that things DON'T play out the same way - how only a minority RLJ'ers and all pedestrians are happy sharing with pavement cyclists.

The majority of pedestrians everywhere basically don't give a damn about cyclists on pavements so long as they're not inconveniencing anyone, and I'll wager that a majority of cyclists everywhere obey red lights.

The increased number of cyclists on the roads of London is seeing the same kind of tripe repeated in the national press that we've had for years in the local press; London is just catching up with Cambridge with regard to the negative view that people have of cyclists.
 

jonny jeez

Legendary Member
shouldbeinbed said:
Jonny Jeez

er not quite. the article referred to cyclists as a tribe of bandits in the first instance, tarring us all with the same brush.


Well put shouldbeinbed., so much so that I have re-read the article to check my original comment.

But, I still think you we are sometimes guilty of acting in a (as you put it) knee jerk fashion.

The paragraph that refers to all cyclists as Bandits is simply being ironic...read further down to see this, we are not all the same and the "bad" needs to be weeded out before we can ever promote a positive image

"With millions more of us on bikes, all that jumping of traffic lights and riding on pavements will have to stop"

I suspect that I just read this article with a different head on to you and saw it as a cyclist getting it wrong (in more ways than one) and then realising this.

That said, I don't read the times regularly and so cannot comment on their track record, if it is as bad as you say, then perhaps I would have read this with a different viewpoint
 

brokenbetty

Über Member
Location
London
Cab said:
I'll wager that a majority of cyclists everywhere obey red lights.

I'll take that wager - I choose any weekday morning between 7.30 and 9.30 am on the A10 between Stoke Newington and Shoreditch as the sample.
 

Origamist

Legendary Member
brokenbetty said:
I'll take that wager - I choose any weekday morning between 7.30 and 9.30 am on the A10 between Stoke Newington and Shoreditch as the sample.

I look forward to your report as it would suggest an unusually high level of non-compliance.

Here are some of TFL findings:

5 sites studied:

Site 1 - Vauxhall Bridge
Site 2 – Balham High Road
Site 3 - Brixton Hill
Site 4 - Camberwell New Road
Site 5 - Greenwich South Street.


Genaral conclusions from all 5 sites.​

The majority of cyclists (84%) obey red traffic lights.​

Violation is not endemic, but 1 in 6 (16%) of cyclists do jump a red light, and at this level may encourage more to do so in the future.

A much greater number of men cycle during the morning and evening peaks.When a comparison is made of the behaviour of male and female cyclists it can be concluded that men are slightly more likely to violate red lights (17% compared to 13%).

In general cyclists who ride through red lights are more likely to do so whilst travelling straight ahead at a junction. They are least likely to do so when turning right.

Red light violations are most common by cyclists travelling towards central London in the morning, and away from central London in the evening.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/businessandpartners/traffic-note-8-cycling-red-lights.pdf
 
A very useful link, Origamist, I've bookmarked it. Should be sent to every journo who persists in uttering the old canard about 'all cyclists jump red lights'...

Incidentally, I can uphold one of those findings (Brixton Hill) by my direct observation, although my sample size is a bit small! I don't visit London all that often, but on this occasion, yes, I was going down Brixton Hill and got to some red lights. About six or seven other cyclists were approaching the lights at the same time as me, some in the same direction, some opposite. Knowing 'London cyclists', I fully expected some of them to RLJ. Not a single one did. :tongue: So there!
 

brokenbetty

Über Member
Location
London
Origamist said:
I look forward to your report as it would suggest an unusually high level of non-compliance.

I ran a count the other day and from Seven Sisters Road until I got to Bishopsgate the RLJ-ers were ahead something like 28 incidents to 17.

The considerate cyclists ended up slightly ahead by the time I'd gone through the City though.
 

Origamist

Legendary Member
brokenbetty said:
I ran a count the other day and from Seven Sisters Road until I got to Bishopsgate the RLJ-ers were ahead something like 28 incidents to 17.

The considerate cyclists ended up slightly ahead by the time I'd gone through the City though.

Good stuff, BB. Have you considered a career with TFL's Road Network Performance & Research Team?:tongue:

Seriously though, RLJing will vary considerably from site to site. I have seen earlier TFL reports where non compliance levels were running considerably higher (IIRC, as high as 33% across different London sites).
 

Nipper

New Member
On the cyclists RLJing or riding pavements... it is site specific because all of the roads are made for the benefit of cars and so there are times when it is safe/safer to jump a light or ride the pavement. I don't think it is a bad thing to do this... take for example the pedestrianised high street in Taunton. A by-law prohibits cycling on this road but allows HGVs and cars to drive along it at all times except between 12:00pm and 3:00pm. Cyclists have to ride a busy main road instead, and so many, many cyclists choose to ride the road during the morning rush hour. It is a sensible and safe choice to make.


661-Pete said:
This sort of thread lends weight to my argument that CycleChat should have a 'Press' section: so that we can total-up the number of hostile press articles we have all come across, and assess for ourselves just how big the problem is. Bad Press is a significant issue for cycling. And what's more, I'm sure the journos themselves spend a bit of time scouring the forums for feedback. Why not give them what they're after, to our benefit maybe?

I don't think people will be able to agree what is a good or bad article. I thought this a good article with a poor title. However I think all sport cycling articles are bad because they give the wrong impression about what cycling is really about.
 

MacB

Lover of things that come in 3's
661-Pete said:
Bad Press is a significant issue for cycling./QUOTE]

Pete, I agree with this but would actually expand to say that Bad Press is a serious issue. How often does something happy, good or positive capture a prominent position in the news? Along with tidings of doom they like to bash 'out' groups and cyclists qualify. As a group the most harm is caused by motorists but they don't get a bashing.
 
Top Bottom