You have no idea obviously, it's a race and that is how it is ridden, They were not too close or too fast the spectator was a 100% to blame.
Don't forget your helmet
- Thread starter jimriley
- Start date
Lots of crashes today made the tour stage a near free for all up front, even Sagan came a cropper after getting caught by Caleb Ewens bad looking off on the final run in/sprint. GT had his shoulder popped back in and finished quite well considering, going to be a lot of sore bodies tomorrow following the carnage today.
Injury to riders notwithstanding (I hope they're all OK) but it's this kind of sporting spectacle that gives cycling in this country the reputation of being dangerous. So this becomes the oft repeated mantra, 'How can you ride a bike, it's so risky?'.
This along with the fact that the ONLY cycle adverts/depictions seen are for exactly these road bikes or, perhaps, some mountain bike extremis, gives the idea that it's a sport only. Of course all these guys wear helmets, they're doing something at the extreme end of cycling.
And that's exactly why I don't wear one (personal choice) because I am a, rarely seen or spoken of in this country, leisure/utility cyclist.
Therefore:
1 I don't ride at 40-60kph, I pootle around at 15-25kph.
2 My spine is not parralell to the road with my head down. I am upright and observing all around me.
3 I am not trying to go as fast as I can regardless of risk, I'm just trying to get my shopping home/get to the cafe for a butty.
4 I ride solo or with my wife, not in a tightly packed group all trying to get a tow.
5 I don't ride extreme trails (recently rode the Brecon canal tow path - does that count?).
6 I am unashamedly a fair weather rider.
All this means that I don't fall off. I am no more likely to fall of my bike than I am to fall over whilst walking. Whilst helmet compulsion may not stop me it would **** me off and certainly acts as a deterrant to new cyclists.
Outside my house there is no pavement. I have to walk about 40yards to where my van is parked. Despit a 30 limit cars do not slow or move out and still squeeze past me when something is coming the other way. Really, I am at more risk every day walking to my van than I am cycling our lovely hilly lanes. Perhaps I should get a 'going to the van' helmet.
I hope that common sense prevails and the wearing of protective gear remains in the realms of extreme pursuits, as it does in motor sport.
This along with the fact that the ONLY cycle adverts/depictions seen are for exactly these road bikes or, perhaps, some mountain bike extremis, gives the idea that it's a sport only. Of course all these guys wear helmets, they're doing something at the extreme end of cycling.
And that's exactly why I don't wear one (personal choice) because I am a, rarely seen or spoken of in this country, leisure/utility cyclist.
Therefore:
1 I don't ride at 40-60kph, I pootle around at 15-25kph.
2 My spine is not parralell to the road with my head down. I am upright and observing all around me.
3 I am not trying to go as fast as I can regardless of risk, I'm just trying to get my shopping home/get to the cafe for a butty.
4 I ride solo or with my wife, not in a tightly packed group all trying to get a tow.
5 I don't ride extreme trails (recently rode the Brecon canal tow path - does that count?).
6 I am unashamedly a fair weather rider.
All this means that I don't fall off. I am no more likely to fall of my bike than I am to fall over whilst walking. Whilst helmet compulsion may not stop me it would **** me off and certainly acts as a deterrant to new cyclists.
Outside my house there is no pavement. I have to walk about 40yards to where my van is parked. Despit a 30 limit cars do not slow or move out and still squeeze past me when something is coming the other way. Really, I am at more risk every day walking to my van than I am cycling our lovely hilly lanes. Perhaps I should get a 'going to the van' helmet.
I hope that common sense prevails and the wearing of protective gear remains in the realms of extreme pursuits, as it does in motor sport.
'Steep' hill by the locks.
I have paddled it, in a kayak, wearing a helmet of course ..........................
Draught: 0.75 metres, 2.46 ft, so you'd be alright if it sank, just stroll ashore.
.
What you are ignoring is the fact that most motorcyclists prefer wearing a helmet because it keeps their head warm. I rode a motor bike in the old days and wore my helmet because it was very effective at keeping me warm, particularly in the winter of 1963.
Leisure cyclists are only going slowly and very unlikely to suffer a head injury. Apparently the risk of such head injury on a bike per mile is the same risk as walking a mile.
Firstly simple logic points in that direction on a time basis. A pedestrian has about 20 minutes to fall or act unwisely while walking a mile, a cyclist has only between 3 and 5 minutes typically, so less opportunity.
And here's an article supporting what Mike Killay said:
Is it more dangerous to be a pedestrian than a cyclist? - Full Fact
Following two-wheeled successes for team GB at the Olympics, cycling is in the news agenda again. But after the Guardian raised the issue of cycling safety, just how dangerous is it to take to the streets rather than the pavements?
fullfact.org
Little girl was told by Dad to wear her cycle helmet all the time, as kids do they get up to all sorts (I should know because once upon ago I was one). Said girl and her mates decide to climb a tree as they do, little girl slipped and helmet strap caught up in a branch and was strangled. Sadly little girl died, a true event from 2019/2020.
Yes, I remember that sad case.
One trouble with small children is that their heads are a different shape which often prompts then to wear the helmet on the back of the head where it isn't effective against forward injury and leaves the helmet strap around the neck:
This has no relevance to road cycling and the wearing of helmets but thanks for warning me to take my helmet off if I decide to go tree climbing. A young lad in our town was on a bmx crashed banged his head and died a couple of years ago which is a more relevant case for wearing helmets.
The relevance is whether cycling or not under certain circumstance's they aren't any good.
Personally for most riding they are not of much use, they are if you like to go fast or ride more extremely.
Personally for most riding they are not of much use, they are if you like to go fast or ride more extremely.
Absolute rubbish, where is your evidence for these circumstances and climbing trees has no relevance as the poor young girl was not cycling, you may as well say cycle helmets are no good in a house fire.
Latest UK road casualty stats reveal cycling is safer per mile than walking
But with cyclists still disproportionately at risk, Cycling UK says more needs to be done
Obviously those figures include all cyclists, not just the slowcoaches.
You're welcome.
I certainly wouldn't say that, after all, firemen wear helmets for a reason.
.
Amoto,
You are losing it demanding evidence for every little thing and then being shot down in flames.
If you want to wear a helmet then that is just fine.
You have no right to force your opinions on to others by law.
That is just part of the Great British busybody, nanny knows best, nit picking fusspot control freak association agenda.
Yes, but there is probably more to it.
Lots of people these days seem to feel a need to achieve something notable or just to get 'likes' on social media.
Making cycle helmets compulsory is an apparent quick win and when the number of head injuries fall, the proponents of the legislation will feel well justified; look what we did, vote for me\us !
Of course its well known that such legislation would likley lead to a reduction in cycle use and such a reduction could further reduce the accident statistics making the change apparently even more beneficial.
The telling factor in this debate, which does make you question the exact motives of those promoting compulsory helmet wearing, is that there is no apparent interest in even considering the overall impact of such a change.
This is not true. There are even a couple of posts in this thread that describe cycle accidents where there would have been serious injury if a helmet had not been worn & they were not riding fast or extremely.
Wearing a helmet is like having insurance 99.9% of the time you don't need it but just occasionally you will be really grateful that you have it.
Just because you & I have never had an accident where a cycle helmet would have protected us doesn't negate the need to wear one. For obvious reasons we don't have any replies from those who suffered serious head injuries because they weren't wearing a helmet but there are a couple of posts in this thread where people had accidents where a helmet protected them from head injury.
As I mentioned in another reply wearing a cycle helmet is like insurance 99.9% of the time you don't need it but just occasionally you will be really glad that you do have it.
Still not an arguement for compulsion.
Related Articles
-
MTF Enterprises announces acquisition of EMU Electric Bikes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Wisper 806T folding bike wins Which? ‘Best Buy’- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Sustrans calls for protected cycle lanes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Amazon launch their first UK e-cargo micromobility hub- Started by: Pedelecs
