Why is there so much animosity towards cyclists in Sheffield?

[small_hall 10]

I dont think that its just Sheffield that hates cyclists. From my perspective its down to a couple of things - Firstly I can think of several other cities where cyclists are not popular, however there are also cities that have more tolerance to cyclists ( York for one), and try to create a cycling friendly zone, and try to be accommodating.

 

SCC on the other hand dont give a hoot & instead try to push public transport down peoples necks at every available opportunity. Sheffield also has the worst roads i have ever seen from tarmacking, to badly placed junctions, confusing traffic light placings, badly placed pedestrian crossings and this is across the city. Its not in just one particular area.

 

As a cyclist (fair weather )& a driver- i have experienced both sides of the coin. I quite often see cyclists run red lights or come close to knocking a pedestrian down ( this also happened to me - crossing on a toucan crossing near pure gym? well i think that's the name of it. Lights were on red myself plus others were crossing..cars had stopped but cyclist decided he wasnt going too & promptly pretty much nearly ploughed me along with other crossers down:|). Its because of goons like this, that give other cyclists a bad reputation. However i do think they are a smaller percentage of the cycler go'ers.

 

The other issue is drivers lack of patience - most drivers are desperate to just get past a cyclist full stop, even if circumstances are not ideal and the best thing the driver could do is just hang back a little until the road becomes clearer of traffic or until they get a better view (if on a blind bend - the number of cars i see overtaking cyclists on a blind corner is shocking). Hanging on a few seconds is not going to make a blind bit of difference to end journey time. On top of that you have a lot of drivers who dont give enough space when overtaking , and pull back in way too soon and then its a close shave as to whether you get sent flying or not.

 

With regards to road tax - i would imagine most cyclists are also car owners. So they would pay Road Tax already. I also dont see how it would ever be possible to police a tax for cyclists?

[geared 302]

This was yesterday, minor incident;

 

 

Only minor because I shouted and the car stopped before running into me. Inattention from an elderly driver!

 

Isn't that red car a Peugeot????

 

 

You are right there are millions of cars in the U.K who display the no road tax disc.

 

The tax disc was phased out last year.

 

No-one needs to display one anymore.

[cuttsie 1,089]

Isn't that red car a Peugeot????

 

 

 

 

The tax disc was phased out last year.

 

No-one needs to display one anymore.

I know.!!!!!!!!

[onewheeldave 22]

Can you imagine if the bicycle never existed and someone invented it today and took it on Dragons Den....

 

Hi Dragons

 

I have invented a new form of transport, that will revolutionise the way we travel and use the roads. It is a steel frame with two, Yes two wheels. Similar to a Motorcycle but you don't have to tax, insure or wear all that cumbersome protective clothing.

 

You would be able to travel in excess of 40mph at the side of lorries and cars doing up to 60mph, with little visibility, able to weave between the cars and pull to the front of them at traffic lights. The tyres will be so narrow that they might slip on ice and snow and get caught in tramlines and get easily damaged by potholes but that's only a small price to pay for an otherwise payment free form of transport.

 

Admittedly cars and lorries passing may cause wobbles and a few thousand fatalities, the cyclist may pull up at the side of vehicles in blind spots and get crushed, driver may not see the poor lit few cycles and turn in to them causing a few more thousand fatalities.

But just think of the emission savings.

 

 

Can you imagine if the car never existed and someone invented it today and took it on Dragons Den....

 

Hi Dragons

I have invented a new form of transport, that will revolutionise the way we travel and use the roads. It is a metal box with 4 wheels.

 

It will destroy the environment with pollution and ruin public health as everyone who buys one will quickly become so addicted to it that they will cease to walk- obesity will become the norm and a whole host of chronic health conditions caused, in part, by lack of exercise, will reach epidemic proportions and bring the NHS to it's knees.

 

Due to the large amounts of profit in manufacturing these metal boxes, marketing companies will line up to push it onto the gullible and easily manipulated public and it will be advertised relentlessly in all media.

 

As a result cars will take over the public landscape with roads threading through every bit of public space. From rising in the morning till going to bed at night, the sight, noise and smell of cars will be ubiquitous in everybodys life. Indeed, many will live next to roads with activity that never ceases, and have to sleep with the noise of thousands of vehicles trundling through the night.

 

Thousands annually will be maimed, killed and crushed beneath the wheels of this metal box, including many children.

 

As cars spread and grow like a tumour into our land, so will they infect the minds of the population, so that after only a few decades, this vision of utter insanity will be so pervasive that cars are seen as normal, good and essential.

 

As the addiction continues to grow, the numbers of cars will grossly exceed the capacity of roads to carry them. this, combined with the fact that society and the economy will shape themselves around cars, so that people will work in places so distant that cars will be necessary for them to get there, will lead to gridlocked, static jams of cars each morning and evening.

 

Financing their metal boxes will cost a significant portion of their annual salary. Additionally with insurance companies and councils seeing these gullible victims as easy cash cows, they will take advantage of them with ever increasing insurance premiums and taxes/parking fines.

 

As the poor drivers sit in their metal boxes each day in the, by now, totally normal gridlocked jam, they will feel growing resentment towards the fit, healthy and free cyclists zipping by.

 

Deep inside on some subconscious level, the prisoners of these metal boxes will know that they have been royally screwed over, but, unable to admit the truth, will instead, blame cyclists for their misfortune.

 

When they see a cyclist in front of them, they will blame their inability to pass, not on the other hundred moving cars in clear sight taking up the entire opposite lane, and, not on the rows of hundreds of parked cars down both sides of the road, but, will place the blame solely on the solitary cyclist directly in front of them.

 

What do you think Dragons? Will it be a winner?

[alchemist 35]

When a car races the lights at 20, 30 0r forty miles per hour it is a million times more dangerous than a cyclist tinkering through when safe to do so.

 

When safe to do so????? So you are saying that its OK to jump red lights if nothing is coming?

 

I would love to see how THAT goes down with the police.

 

Also, is it OK for a car to creep through a red light then? At what speed should it become illeagal?

[Cyclone 10]

The point is over there, Cyclone ---->

 

You missed it, I'm afraid.

 

You missed the <irony> or <sarcasm> tags, so I didn't get it

 

---------- Post added 23-04-2015 at 11:26 ----------

 

I wish I had a pound for every time I have seen a numpty on a pushbike think that red lights don't apply to them. This is prevalent at the end of Ecclesfield Wood bottom at the Meadowhall end. When confronted by a red light here the majority go onto the pavement round inside of traffic light and run gauntlet of the cross traffic whose light is on green. How some of them haven't been knocked off or killed I can only assume is down to the skill of the car driver. When I was working and using that route this was a daily occurrence. Of course if they did get hit the car driver would be at fault

 

No they wouldn't. Particularly if a cyclist is crossing from pavement to pavement through traffic that has a green light.

[JFKvsNixon 11]

When safe to do so????? So you are saying that its OK to jump red lights if nothing is coming?

 

I would love to see how THAT goes down with the police.

 

Also, is it OK for a car to creep through a red light then? At what speed should it become illeagal?

 

It probably goes down as well as drivers speeding, and we all know how many do that.

 

This tit for tat war could go on for ever. Can't we all just admit that there are good and bad drivers, and good and bad cyclists, and also can we stop trying to hold all cyclists accountable for the actions of the bad cyclists?

[sheff71 10]

Im quite sure people think the same about cyclists in Leeds, and Manchester, and Birmingham etc...

 

Why the opening poster thinks it is a Sheffield-specific hatred is beyond me.

 

Let's be fair though, the hatred from cyclists towards drivers (many of whom are also cyclists) is just as bitter as the other way round - it's not just a one way thing.

 

Just as there are sensible drivers and careless drivers, there are plenty of seasoned, experienced cyclists (those that are on this thread) on the road - but also many who really shouldn't just be allowed to go straight onto the roads (and it's many of these that give cyclists a bad reputation).

 

It just seems crazy that drivers can't take their tests until 17, and when they're learning to drive they have to have L plates on - giving other road users an indication it's an inexperienced driver, so they can adjust accordingly.

 

However, anyone can just pick up a bike and without any experience of cycling in traffic or on the roads, can go straight out and do that...not even having had to look at the highway code. It's nothing to do with drivers need a licence so cyclists should do also - it's so that other road users can have some confidence that the cyclist up ahead is aware of their responsibilities on the road too. There are enough inconsiderate or abusive road users on all sides as it is already.

 

Cars are here for good - and so are cycles...so there's got to be some kind of middle ground to work together for safer roads for all users - not just cyclists or motorists.

 

The much used argument that making cyclists do some kind of test or training before they go out onto the main roads is a barrier to them using the road... if someone who wants to be a cyclist on the major roads isn't prepared to spend just a little time with a more experienced cyclist, just until they get a feel of the road conditions - then I'd be worried that other obstacles, such as red lights, might also be too much of an inconvenience to them too, with that attitude.

 

Just increasing the number of cyclists on the road with ill-prepared novices can't be a good thing, and will just add to the number of incidents on the roads, and no doubt injuries/deaths would increase too. If you're going to spend hundreds of pounds on a flash bike, what's another fiver or so on top of that, if it helps prepare cyclists better?

[Cyclone 10]

I think someone was taking the urine, and you fell for it Well done

 

Ah well, I'm not perfect.

 

---------- Post added 23-04-2015 at 11:32 ----------

 

No I just think low emission cars should pay some too. Yes they dont pollute but they use the roads to drive from A to B and the roads have to be paid for.

 

That's what general taxation is for. Otherwise horses, scooters, skateboards and pedestrians would all need to pay road tax as well!

 

---------- Post added 23-04-2015 at 11:35 ----------

 

Let's be fair though, the hatred from cyclists towards drivers (many of whom are also cyclists) is just as bitter as the other way round - it's not just a one way thing.

Not true (at least for this cyclist and motorist). I only hate people who endanger my life.

 

Just as there are sensible drivers and careless drivers, there are plenty of seasoned, experienced cyclists (those that are on this thread) on the road - but also many who really shouldn't just be allowed to go straight onto the roads (and it's many of these that give cyclists a bad reputation).

 

It just seems crazy that drivers can't take their tests until 17, and when they're learning to drive they have to have L plates on - giving other road users an indication it's an inexperienced driver, so they can adjust accordingly.

 

However, anyone can just pick up a bike and without any experience of cycling in traffic or on the roads, can go straight out and do that...not even having had to look at the highway code. It's nothing to do with drivers need a licence so cyclists should do also - it's so that other road users can have some confidence that the cyclist up ahead is aware of their responsibilities on the road too. There are enough inconsiderate or abusive road users on all sides as it is already.

 

Cars are here for good - and so are cycles...so there's got to be some kind of middle ground to work together for safer roads for all users - not just cyclists or motorists.

The good example from the Netherlands is to minimise barriers to cycling, the more cyclists there are, the safer they are. Most cyclists aren't keen on endangering their own life, it's basic self preservation.

 

The much used argument that making cyclists do some kind of test or training before they go out onto the main roads is a barrier to them using the road... if someone who wants to be a cyclist on the major roads isn't prepared to spend just a little time with a more experienced cyclist, just until they get a feel of the road conditions - then I'd be worried that other obstacles, such as red lights, might also be too much of an inconvenience to them too, with that attitude.

It's a very good argument against it. Barriers decrease uptake, and lower numbers increase the danger.

 

Just increasing the number of cyclists on the road with ill-prepared novices can't be a good thing, and will just add to the number of incidents on the roads, and no doubt injuries/deaths would increase too. If you're going to spend hundreds of pounds on a flash bike, what's another fiver or so on top of that, if it helps prepare cyclists better?

It is a good thing, because they stop being novices quite quickly and everyone gets safer as cycle numbers increase.

[sheff71 10]

Ah well, I'm not perfect.

 

---------- Post added 23-04-2015 at 11:32 ----------

 

 

That's what general taxation is for. Otherwise horses, scooters, skateboards and pedestrians would all need to pay road tax as well!

 

---------- Post added 23-04-2015 at 11:35 ----------

 

Not true (at least for this cyclist and motorist). I only hate people who endanger my life.

The good example from the Netherlands is to minimise barriers to cycling, the more cyclists there are, the safer they are. Most cyclists aren't keen on endangering their own life, it's basic self preservation.

It's a very good argument against it. Barriers decrease uptake, and lower numbers increase the danger.

It is a good thing, because they stop being novices quite quickly and everyone gets safer as cycle numbers increase.

 

Most drivers also aren't keen on endangering their own life, either - or anyone else for that matter.

[Cyclone 10]

I fail to see your point?

 

You were claiming that cyclists cycle badly because they don't know what to do. I suggested that most don't want to endanger themselves and so you are wrong.

 

I agree that most drivers don't want to endanger themselves either, that's why they avoid running into cars most of the time. They seem to be less concerned about bikes though, as that doesn't endanger them, it only kills someone else!

 

---------- Post added 23-04-2015 at 11:49 ----------

 

You also said this

However, anyone can just pick up a bike and without any experience of cycling in traffic or on the roads, can go straight out and do that...not even having had to look at the highway code. It's nothing to do with drivers need a licence so cyclists should do also - it's so that other road users can have some confidence that the cyclist up ahead is aware of their responsibilities on the road too. There are enough inconsiderate or abusive road users on all sides as it is already.

So it's clear that being taught to use the road doesn't stop people being inconsiderate or abusive (or bad at it).

[dutch 68]

Edited April 23, 2015 by dutch