A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

never undertake



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 17th 13, 08:36 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mrcheerful[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,662
Default never undertake

This could have been avoided totally if the cyclist had not gone up the
inside. Drivers just do not realise how stupid cyclists can be.

http://road.cc/content/news/12315-dr...-lorrys-wheels



  #2  
Old July 17th 13, 08:47 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
John Benn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 865
Default never undertake

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
This could have been avoided totally if the cyclist had not gone up the
inside. Drivers just do not realise how stupid cyclists can be.

http://road.cc/content/news/12315-dr...-lorrys-wheels




Psychos call it filtering!

  #3  
Old July 17th 13, 09:13 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default never undertake

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 08:36:24 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

This could have been avoided totally if the cyclist had not gone up the
inside. Drivers just do not realise how stupid cyclists can be.

http://road.cc/content/news/12315-dr...-lorrys-wheels


Can you quote the part of that report which states the cyclist was
undertaking or had undertaken the truck?

Failing that, can you quote the part of that report which suggests the
cyclist was undertaking or had undertaken the truck?
  #4  
Old July 17th 13, 09:34 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mrcheerful[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,662
Default never undertake

Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 08:36:24 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

This could have been avoided totally if the cyclist had not gone up
the inside. Drivers just do not realise how stupid cyclists can be.

http://road.cc/content/news/12315-dr...-lorrys-wheels


Can you quote the part of that report which states the cyclist was
undertaking or had undertaken the truck?

Failing that, can you quote the part of that report which suggests the
cyclist was undertaking or had undertaken the truck?


Yes:
"The driver was in the cycle box so we couldn't get in front" therefore the
cyclists came up the inside.


  #5  
Old July 17th 13, 10:13 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default never undertake

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:34:08 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 08:36:24 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

This could have been avoided totally if the cyclist had not gone up
the inside. Drivers just do not realise how stupid cyclists can be.

http://road.cc/content/news/12315-dr...-lorrys-wheels


Can you quote the part of that report which states the cyclist was
undertaking or had undertaken the truck?

Failing that, can you quote the part of that report which suggests the
cyclist was undertaking or had undertaken the truck?


Yes:
"The driver was in the cycle box so we couldn't get in front" therefore the
cyclists came up the inside.


That suggests nothing of the sort.

It suggests this:
The cyclists were in the cycle box when the truck pulled alongside by
going into the cycle box. The cyclists could not get ahead of the
truck because that would mean going leaving the cycle box.
  #6  
Old July 17th 13, 10:13 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mrcheerful[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,662
Default never undertake

Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:34:08 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 08:36:24 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

This could have been avoided totally if the cyclist had not gone up
the inside. Drivers just do not realise how stupid cyclists can
be.

http://road.cc/content/news/12315-dr...-lorrys-wheels

Can you quote the part of that report which states the cyclist was
undertaking or had undertaken the truck?

Failing that, can you quote the part of that report which suggests
the cyclist was undertaking or had undertaken the truck?


Yes:
"The driver was in the cycle box so we couldn't get in front"
therefore the cyclists came up the inside.


That suggests nothing of the sort.

It suggests this:
The cyclists were in the cycle box when the truck pulled alongside by
going into the cycle box. The cyclists could not get ahead of the
truck because that would mean going leaving the cycle box.


only in the mind of a psycholist.


  #7  
Old July 17th 13, 12:19 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Judith[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,000
Default never undertake

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 10:13:13 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:34:08 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 08:36:24 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

This could have been avoided totally if the cyclist had not gone up
the inside. Drivers just do not realise how stupid cyclists can be.

http://road.cc/content/news/12315-dr...-lorrys-wheels

Can you quote the part of that report which states the cyclist was
undertaking or had undertaken the truck?

Failing that, can you quote the part of that report which suggests the
cyclist was undertaking or had undertaken the truck?


Yes:
"The driver was in the cycle box so we couldn't get in front" therefore the
cyclists came up the inside.


That suggests nothing of the sort.

It suggests this:
The cyclists were in the cycle box when the truck pulled alongside by
going into the cycle box. The cyclists could not get ahead of the
truck because that would mean going leaving the cycle box.



Oh dear :

"If Miss Fernandez was five metres ahead in the cycling box Mr Grant would
have seen her."
  #8  
Old July 17th 13, 12:45 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default never undertake

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 12:19:04 +0100, Judith
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 10:13:13 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:34:08 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 08:36:24 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

This could have been avoided totally if the cyclist had not gone up
the inside. Drivers just do not realise how stupid cyclists can be.

http://road.cc/content/news/12315-dr...-lorrys-wheels

Can you quote the part of that report which states the cyclist was
undertaking or had undertaken the truck?

Failing that, can you quote the part of that report which suggests the
cyclist was undertaking or had undertaken the truck?

Yes:
"The driver was in the cycle box so we couldn't get in front" therefore the
cyclists came up the inside.


That suggests nothing of the sort.

It suggests this:
The cyclists were in the cycle box when the truck pulled alongside by
going into the cycle box. The cyclists could not get ahead of the
truck because that would mean going leaving the cycle box.



Oh dear :

"If Miss Fernandez was five metres ahead in the cycling box Mr Grant would
have seen her."


But she couldn't be five metres ahead because the truck was there. If
the truck was there she hadn't undertaken. If she had undertaken she
would have been ahead.
  #9  
Old July 17th 13, 12:17 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Judith[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,000
Default never undertake

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:13:02 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 08:36:24 +0100, "Mrcheerful"
wrote:

This could have been avoided totally if the cyclist had not gone up the
inside. Drivers just do not realise how stupid cyclists can be.

http://road.cc/content/news/12315-dr...-lorrys-wheels


Can you quote the part of that report which states the cyclist was
undertaking or had undertaken the truck?

Failing that, can you quote the part of that report which suggests the
cyclist was undertaking or had undertaken the truck?



Even more relevant : can you quote the bit where the driver was found guilty of
an offence.

  #10  
Old July 17th 13, 07:34 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default never undertake

On 17/07/2013 09:13, Bertie Wooster wrote:

"Mrcheerful" wrote:


This could have been avoided totally if the cyclist had not gone up the
inside. Drivers just do not realise how stupid cyclists can be.


http://road.cc/content/news/12315-dr...-lorrys-wheels


Can you quote the part of that report which states the cyclist was
undertaking or had undertaken the truck?


Failing that, can you quote the part of that report which suggests the
cyclist was undertaking or had undertaken the truck?


A reasonable inference if - and only if - the lorry was a regular RHD
model for use on British roads.

Did you see this bit?

QUOTE
Deputy coroner Gail Elliman said: “The lorry wasn't stopped in the right
place. If Miss Fernandez was five metres ahead in the cycling box Mr
Grant would have seen her. But the [lorry's] indicator could have been
seen by Miss Fernandez. Caution might have been exercised if she
believed it was going to turn left.”
ENDQUOTE

"left"...

And there's this from someone who was the

QUOTE:
Riccardo Rispoli ... was cycling with her at the time of the crash in
June...

Speaking after the verdict, Mr Rispoli, a yacht designer, said: ... “I
do not blame the driver...".

Of course, he has the disadvantage of actually having been there.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pass a door's width away and do not undertake Mrcheerful[_3_] UK 71 May 16th 13 04:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.