CyclingForums
A community for cyclists, gear, training and racing.
UK and Europe · Public discussion
Thread navigation
Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.
Thread details
The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.
Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?
What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.
--
Conor
"Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most." O.Osbourne.
On Mon, 30 May 2005 01:33:24 +0100, Conor <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.
*plonk*
"Bob"
--
Email address is spam trapped.
To reply directly remove the beverage.
Conor said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.
Could have been worse, he could have wiped out Clarkson's scriptwriter. 🙂
Conor said:
Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.
Clearly sounds as if the cyclist failed.
If with testing, licencing and insurance Clarkson had been wiped out,
I'm fully with you.
John B
"Conor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.
Because we all know that lorry drivers who are tested, licenced and insured
never wipe out anybody.
How was it sleeping under the bridge last night?
Pete
Peter B said:
"Conor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...Quoted message said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.Because we all know that lorry drivers who are tested, licenced and insured
never wipe out anybody.How was it sleeping under the bridge last night?
Troll ;-)
Quoted message said:Pete
"Conor" wrote in message
Quoted message said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.
Whilst I agree with the above, if the cyclist had succeeded it would
probably have been the biggest leap forward for general road safety in the
history of the UK.
Ian
"Conor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.
Clearly he was tested and licensed as required by law.
What evidence do you wish to submit to suggest that he wasn't insured?
T
Conor ([email hidden]) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying :
Quoted message said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?
He missed?
<demands refund>
On Mon, 30 May 2005 01:33:24 +0100, Conor <[email hidden]>
wrote in message : said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?
What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.
Absolutely. We need to raise their skill levels to the point where he
would have succeeded and rid the planet of the wooly-haired bigot.
Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken
"Conor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?
Anyone see that loonie Clarkson walk out into the middle of a road without
looking and nearly get taken out by a cyclist using the road legitimately?
I appreciate Top Gear entertainment as much as the average uk.rec.driver but
sometimes things get a bit one sided!
Conor said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.
<motorist>
"What are you complaining about? I didn't hit you"
</motorist>
--
Tony
"Don't argue the matter, the difficulties will argue for themselves"
-W.S. Churchill
In article <[email hidden]>, Tony W says...
Quoted message said:
"Conor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...Quoted message said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.Clearly he was tested and licensed as required by law.
What evidence do you wish to submit to suggest that he wasn't insured?
The lack of compulsory need.
--
Conor
"Be incomprehensible. If they can't understand, they can't disagree"
Conor said:In article <[email hidden]>, Tony W says...
Quoted message said:"Conor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...Quoted message said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.Clearly he was tested and licensed as required by law.
What evidence do you wish to submit to suggest that he wasn't insured?
The lack of compulsory need.
Wow
"Conor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Quoted message said:What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.Clearly he was tested and licensed as required by law.
What evidence do you wish to submit to suggest that he wasn't insured?
The lack of compulsory need.
Yes -- that complies with your prejudice.
But what REAL evidence do you wish to submit to suggest that he wasn't
insured?
Many cyclists are insured through household policies, club membership or
separate insurance cover. Estimates suggests up to 20% of motorists are
not insured. Which is more dangerous -- an uninsured [censored] in a car or the
same uninsured [censored] on a bike?
T
Conor said:In article <[email hidden]>, Tony W says...
Quoted message said:
"Conor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...Quoted message said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.Clearly he was tested and licensed as required by law.
What evidence do you wish to submit to suggest that he wasn't insured?
The lack of compulsory need.
So Clarkson steps out into the road whilst looking the other way to the
flow of traffic (anyone here remember the green cross code?) and a
cyclist who was not wearing lycra takes appropriate action and misses
him.
Big deal..
Clarkson then tries to blame the cyclist for his own failings (ie
relying on not hearing a car == it is safe to step out without looking)
...d
Conor said:
In article <[email hidden]>, Tony W says...
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:What evidence do you wish to submit to suggest that he wasn't insured?
The lack of compulsory need.
Err, Conor, you really aren't *that* thick are you?
Do you want to reassess your answer?
John B
Conor said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested, licenced
and insured.
It almost happened to me the other day too. I think I was very close
to being in hospital :-o. This cyclist at uni was on the pavement
going around a blind bend, probably doing over 20mph. I saw it come
around, and I didn't know what to do. He was heading straight for me.
If I had moved, he probably would've swerved at the same time, and hit
me. So, I didn't move, and he swerved. I didn't say anything, but I
probably should've shouted at him. Staight after nearly hitting me I
saw him swerving between people, and I could hear his tyres slipping
slightly. Crazy cycling. I suppose I should be greatful that he
wasn't driving a car.
Conor said:In article <[email hidden]>, Tony W says...
Quoted message said:
"Conor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...Quoted message said:Anyone see how close that lycra loonie cyclist got to wiping out
Clarkson on Top Gear tonight?What an excellent example of why cyclists need to be tested,
licenced and insured.Clearly he was tested and licensed as required by law.
What evidence do you wish to submit to suggest that he wasn't
insured?
The lack of compulsory need.
Are you really suggesting that all motor vehicle drivers are therefore
properly insured?
Yet again you fail to think things through, assuming thought forms any part
of your activities.
Peter said:It almost happened to me the other day too. I think I was very close
to being in hospital :-o. This cyclist at uni was on the pavement
going around a blind bend, probably doing over 20mph. I saw it come
around, and I didn't know what to do. He was heading straight for me.
If I had moved, he probably would've swerved at the same time, and hit
me. So, I didn't move, and he swerved. I didn't say anything, but I
probably should've shouted at him. Staight after nearly hitting me I
saw him swerving between people, and I could hear his tyres slipping
slightly. Crazy cycling.
Assuming that your story is accurate (20mph is probably a little high),
the guy was a twonk of the highest order but...
Quoted message said:I suppose I should be greatful that he wasn't driving a car.
Exactly.
Jon
Active in the last 60 minutes
0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total
No signed-in users are active right now.
No known search crawlers active right now.