Sir Bradley Wiggins cancels annual East Lancs cycle ride

Sir Bradley Wiggins surrounded by other cyclists taking part in last year’s event

Sir Bradley Wiggins surrounded by other cyclists taking part in last year’s event

First published in News Blackburn Citizen: Photograph of the Author by

SIR Bradley Wiggins’ annual Ride with Brad cycling event in East Lancashire has been cancelled because the Olympic champion cannot commit to the date.

The event attracted hundreds of cyclists in 2012 and 2013, but it is now set to skip a year because Wiggins, who won the Tour de France two years ago, cannot be certain of making the August 17 ride.

The event sees the Eccleston cyclist lead enthusiasts from across the country on rides of 50km, 100km or 160km along some of his favourite training roads in the Pendle and Ribble Valley countryside.

The rides have started and finished in Barnoldswick’s Victory Park, with a Festival of Sport also attracting visitors.

Last year’s event again attracted hundreds of cyclists despite heavy rain on the day.

In a statement, organisers Pennine Events said: “In consultation with Bradley and his management team we have agreed that due to the importance and demands of his racing schedule for this summer it is better to postpone the event.”

However they are hopeful it will return in 2015.

Wiggins is waiting to hear whether he will be selected for Team Sky’s Tour de France team for the race which starts in Yorkshire on July 5.

He could ride in support of defending champion and team leader Chris Froome, but the pair have clashed over the leadership in the past.

He is also likely to be at the start line for the Tour of Britain, which begins on September 7.

Comments (15)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:18pm Fri 6 Jun 14

HelmshoreBoy says...

He has not been selected for the TdF.
He has not been selected for the TdF. HelmshoreBoy
  • Score: 38

11:05pm Fri 6 Jun 14

Pyewacket2 says...

Certainly hope Wiggo isn't spitting his dummy out because he wasn't selected for the TdF
Certainly hope Wiggo isn't spitting his dummy out because he wasn't selected for the TdF Pyewacket2
  • Score: 41

11:27pm Fri 6 Jun 14

golazzo says...

*****r
*****r golazzo
  • Score: 39

9:54am Sat 7 Jun 14

Manuel Hung says...

Good!

That means there will be one less cyclist on the road or pavement or going through red traffic lights etc......

Ban em all! Anyone who can't afford a car has failed in life!
Good! That means there will be one less cyclist on the road or pavement or going through red traffic lights etc...... Ban em all! Anyone who can't afford a car has failed in life! Manuel Hung
  • Score: -11

11:04am Sat 7 Jun 14

Chris P Bacon says...

Manuel Hung wrote:
Good!

That means there will be one less cyclist on the road or pavement or going through red traffic lights etc......

Ban em all! Anyone who can't afford a car has failed in life!
Deep ignorance of Daily Mail proportions there from someone who'll CLAIM to have seen all the things he of course never has seen.

Manuel Hung; a new hero for the ignorant.
[quote][p][bold]Manuel Hung[/bold] wrote: Good! That means there will be one less cyclist on the road or pavement or going through red traffic lights etc...... Ban em all! Anyone who can't afford a car has failed in life![/p][/quote]Deep ignorance of Daily Mail proportions there from someone who'll CLAIM to have seen all the things he of course never has seen. Manuel Hung; a new hero for the ignorant. Chris P Bacon
  • Score: 10

12:55pm Sat 7 Jun 14

darwenTower says...

Manuel Hung wrote:
Good!

That means there will be one less cyclist on the road or pavement or going through red traffic lights etc......

Ban em all! Anyone who can't afford a car has failed in life!
What an absolute end of a bell.
We are a two car family and I use a cycle for short journeys during the day.

I would suggest that someone who is too bone idle to travel occasionally under their own steam is likely to be a complete life failure.
[quote][p][bold]Manuel Hung[/bold] wrote: Good! That means there will be one less cyclist on the road or pavement or going through red traffic lights etc...... Ban em all! Anyone who can't afford a car has failed in life![/p][/quote]What an absolute end of a bell. We are a two car family and I use a cycle for short journeys during the day. I would suggest that someone who is too bone idle to travel occasionally under their own steam is likely to be a complete life failure. darwenTower
  • Score: 18

3:13pm Sat 7 Jun 14

POW WOW says...

And all the little kiddies will be bawling their eyes out !!!!!!!!!!!!! Nice one Brad !!!!!!!!!
And all the little kiddies will be bawling their eyes out !!!!!!!!!!!!! Nice one Brad !!!!!!!!! POW WOW
  • Score: 32

4:39pm Sat 7 Jun 14

Manuel Hung says...

The roads are overwhelmed by fat middle aged men in bright coloured Lycra trying to re capture their youth or shift an ever expanding beer gut. Which one are you two?

They cycle on the roads or pavement, which ever suits and obey selective rules from the Highway Code. If you are lucky.

The don't pay any road tax yet complain about the pot holes damaging teir wheels nor do they have any insurance. Only two weeks ago I saw a cyclist, head down ride straight into the back of a parked vehicle. Who's going to stump up to repair that then eh?

There is a reason why the internal combustion engine was invented and it was to get rid of these things off the roads!!

And that's not CLAIMING anything. My car has front and rear recording cameras fitted. I was 1st car at a red light. Cyclist went straight through, turned right in front of me & then carried on at a slow pace in the middle of the road holding everyone behind up. But because cyclists also don't have any registration plate fitted they are impossible to report to the police even with video evidence.

Anyone with less patience would have run him off his bike!
The roads are overwhelmed by fat middle aged men in bright coloured Lycra trying to re capture their youth or shift an ever expanding beer gut. Which one are you two? They cycle on the roads or pavement, which ever suits and obey selective rules from the Highway Code. If you are lucky. The don't pay any road tax yet complain about the pot holes damaging teir wheels nor do they have any insurance. Only two weeks ago I saw a cyclist, head down ride straight into the back of a parked vehicle. Who's going to stump up to repair that then eh? There is a reason why the internal combustion engine was invented and it was to get rid of these things off the roads!! And that's not CLAIMING anything. My car has front and rear recording cameras fitted. I was 1st car at a red light. Cyclist went straight through, turned right in front of me & then carried on at a slow pace in the middle of the road holding everyone behind up. But because cyclists also don't have any registration plate fitted they are impossible to report to the police even with video evidence. Anyone with less patience would have run him off his bike! Manuel Hung
  • Score: -16

5:36pm Sat 7 Jun 14

Chris P Bacon says...

Manuel Hung wrote:
The roads are overwhelmed by fat middle aged men in bright coloured Lycra trying to re capture their youth or shift an ever expanding beer gut. Which one are you two?

They cycle on the roads or pavement, which ever suits and obey selective rules from the Highway Code. If you are lucky.

The don't pay any road tax yet complain about the pot holes damaging teir wheels nor do they have any insurance. Only two weeks ago I saw a cyclist, head down ride straight into the back of a parked vehicle. Who's going to stump up to repair that then eh?

There is a reason why the internal combustion engine was invented and it was to get rid of these things off the roads!!

And that's not CLAIMING anything. My car has front and rear recording cameras fitted. I was 1st car at a red light. Cyclist went straight through, turned right in front of me & then carried on at a slow pace in the middle of the road holding everyone behind up. But because cyclists also don't have any registration plate fitted they are impossible to report to the police even with video evidence.

Anyone with less patience would have run him off his bike!
You're a liar. 'Front and rear recording cameras fitted'! And Formica is edible. No 'cyclist' has EVER ridden on the pavement no matter what the Daily Heil tell you. Oh you may see someone WITH a bicycle on a pavement but that's not a cyclist, just a schoolkid or someone with a BSO and unsure of what to do.

And there are vehicles with internal combustion engines ON the road who don't pay any, what you erroneously call 'road tax' as it's all a factor of emissions. As cyclists produce NO emissions, then no VED (the correct name for 'road tax') is not necessary. And, as I'm sure there'll be loads coming on to correct you on your other huge mistake, the VED has not gone on repairing road surfaces since Winston Churchill abolished that aspect when he was Transport Secretary in 1923. Repairs come from general taxation and is not collected via VED. Do keep up you newshound.

There are two kinds of people in this world; cyclists and those who are envious of cyclists and I firmly believe you fall in to the latter, misery-guts, moaning-auld-woman, Daily-Heil-reading-n
obed with a protruding belly category.

But maybe your journeys behind the wheel of your vehicle make you fitter, are conducted in silence disturbing nobody and produce zero emissions? But of course none of those things apply to you, do they?

And lastly, 'registration plate'! That's just too stupid for words and categorises you more than you know.
[quote][p][bold]Manuel Hung[/bold] wrote: The roads are overwhelmed by fat middle aged men in bright coloured Lycra trying to re capture their youth or shift an ever expanding beer gut. Which one are you two? They cycle on the roads or pavement, which ever suits and obey selective rules from the Highway Code. If you are lucky. The don't pay any road tax yet complain about the pot holes damaging teir wheels nor do they have any insurance. Only two weeks ago I saw a cyclist, head down ride straight into the back of a parked vehicle. Who's going to stump up to repair that then eh? There is a reason why the internal combustion engine was invented and it was to get rid of these things off the roads!! And that's not CLAIMING anything. My car has front and rear recording cameras fitted. I was 1st car at a red light. Cyclist went straight through, turned right in front of me & then carried on at a slow pace in the middle of the road holding everyone behind up. But because cyclists also don't have any registration plate fitted they are impossible to report to the police even with video evidence. Anyone with less patience would have run him off his bike![/p][/quote]You're a liar. 'Front and rear recording cameras fitted'! And Formica is edible. No 'cyclist' has EVER ridden on the pavement no matter what the Daily Heil tell you. Oh you may see someone WITH a bicycle on a pavement but that's not a cyclist, just a schoolkid or someone with a BSO and unsure of what to do. And there are vehicles with internal combustion engines ON the road who don't pay any, what you erroneously call 'road tax' as it's all a factor of emissions. As cyclists produce NO emissions, then no VED (the correct name for 'road tax') is not necessary. And, as I'm sure there'll be loads coming on to correct you on your other huge mistake, the VED has not gone on repairing road surfaces since Winston Churchill abolished that aspect when he was Transport Secretary in 1923. Repairs come from general taxation and is not collected via VED. Do keep up you newshound. There are two kinds of people in this world; cyclists and those who are envious of cyclists and I firmly believe you fall in to the latter, misery-guts, moaning-auld-woman, Daily-Heil-reading-n obed with a protruding belly category. But maybe your journeys behind the wheel of your vehicle make you fitter, are conducted in silence disturbing nobody and produce zero emissions? But of course none of those things apply to you, do they? And lastly, 'registration plate'! That's just too stupid for words and categorises you more than you know. Chris P Bacon
  • Score: 19

6:51pm Sat 7 Jun 14

Manuel Hung says...

Er yes. Cameras are fitted. They are very common these days and not that expensive either. We no longer live in the dark ages and technology has advanced and become cheaper too. It also records in something calls 'hi definition' as well. Have a quick look on the internet thing, you will find loads of them.

There are also many more types of people than you appear to be able to think of too. Why do you believe that I am envious of cyclists?

I prefer at arrive at work or any other destination for that matter in a fresh, clean and presentable manner. Not get there, leave my sweaty clothing lying around while I get changed and then bore everyone by telling them how far you have cycled that week whilst explaining your efforts on 'strava'. (That's another technological thing that tracks your progress)

Boring, unaccountable cyclists who think they are the most important thing on the road.
Er yes. Cameras are fitted. They are very common these days and not that expensive either. We no longer live in the dark ages and technology has advanced and become cheaper too. It also records in something calls 'hi definition' as well. Have a quick look on the internet thing, you will find loads of them. There are also many more types of people than you appear to be able to think of too. Why do you believe that I am envious of cyclists? I prefer at arrive at work or any other destination for that matter in a fresh, clean and presentable manner. Not get there, leave my sweaty clothing lying around while I get changed and then bore everyone by telling them how far you have cycled that week whilst explaining your efforts on 'strava'. (That's another technological thing that tracks your progress) Boring, unaccountable cyclists who think they are the most important thing on the road. Manuel Hung
  • Score: -5

7:58pm Sat 7 Jun 14

AnotherPounding4Burnley says...

Chris P Bacon wrote:
Manuel Hung wrote:
The roads are overwhelmed by fat middle aged men in bright coloured Lycra trying to re capture their youth or shift an ever expanding beer gut. Which one are you two?

They cycle on the roads or pavement, which ever suits and obey selective rules from the Highway Code. If you are lucky.

The don't pay any road tax yet complain about the pot holes damaging teir wheels nor do they have any insurance. Only two weeks ago I saw a cyclist, head down ride straight into the back of a parked vehicle. Who's going to stump up to repair that then eh?

There is a reason why the internal combustion engine was invented and it was to get rid of these things off the roads!!

And that's not CLAIMING anything. My car has front and rear recording cameras fitted. I was 1st car at a red light. Cyclist went straight through, turned right in front of me & then carried on at a slow pace in the middle of the road holding everyone behind up. But because cyclists also don't have any registration plate fitted they are impossible to report to the police even with video evidence.

Anyone with less patience would have run him off his bike!
You're a liar. 'Front and rear recording cameras fitted'! And Formica is edible. No 'cyclist' has EVER ridden on the pavement no matter what the Daily Heil tell you. Oh you may see someone WITH a bicycle on a pavement but that's not a cyclist, just a schoolkid or someone with a BSO and unsure of what to do.

And there are vehicles with internal combustion engines ON the road who don't pay any, what you erroneously call 'road tax' as it's all a factor of emissions. As cyclists produce NO emissions, then no VED (the correct name for 'road tax') is not necessary. And, as I'm sure there'll be loads coming on to correct you on your other huge mistake, the VED has not gone on repairing road surfaces since Winston Churchill abolished that aspect when he was Transport Secretary in 1923. Repairs come from general taxation and is not collected via VED. Do keep up you newshound.

There are two kinds of people in this world; cyclists and those who are envious of cyclists and I firmly believe you fall in to the latter, misery-guts, moaning-auld-woman, Daily-Heil-reading-n

obed with a protruding belly category.

But maybe your journeys behind the wheel of your vehicle make you fitter, are conducted in silence disturbing nobody and produce zero emissions? But of course none of those things apply to you, do they?

And lastly, 'registration plate'! That's just too stupid for words and categorises you more than you know.
Oh the irony, a liar calling someone a liar. Burnley fan you're having a Turkish.
[quote][p][bold]Chris P Bacon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Manuel Hung[/bold] wrote: The roads are overwhelmed by fat middle aged men in bright coloured Lycra trying to re capture their youth or shift an ever expanding beer gut. Which one are you two? They cycle on the roads or pavement, which ever suits and obey selective rules from the Highway Code. If you are lucky. The don't pay any road tax yet complain about the pot holes damaging teir wheels nor do they have any insurance. Only two weeks ago I saw a cyclist, head down ride straight into the back of a parked vehicle. Who's going to stump up to repair that then eh? There is a reason why the internal combustion engine was invented and it was to get rid of these things off the roads!! And that's not CLAIMING anything. My car has front and rear recording cameras fitted. I was 1st car at a red light. Cyclist went straight through, turned right in front of me & then carried on at a slow pace in the middle of the road holding everyone behind up. But because cyclists also don't have any registration plate fitted they are impossible to report to the police even with video evidence. Anyone with less patience would have run him off his bike![/p][/quote]You're a liar. 'Front and rear recording cameras fitted'! And Formica is edible. No 'cyclist' has EVER ridden on the pavement no matter what the Daily Heil tell you. Oh you may see someone WITH a bicycle on a pavement but that's not a cyclist, just a schoolkid or someone with a BSO and unsure of what to do. And there are vehicles with internal combustion engines ON the road who don't pay any, what you erroneously call 'road tax' as it's all a factor of emissions. As cyclists produce NO emissions, then no VED (the correct name for 'road tax') is not necessary. And, as I'm sure there'll be loads coming on to correct you on your other huge mistake, the VED has not gone on repairing road surfaces since Winston Churchill abolished that aspect when he was Transport Secretary in 1923. Repairs come from general taxation and is not collected via VED. Do keep up you newshound. There are two kinds of people in this world; cyclists and those who are envious of cyclists and I firmly believe you fall in to the latter, misery-guts, moaning-auld-woman, Daily-Heil-reading-n obed with a protruding belly category. But maybe your journeys behind the wheel of your vehicle make you fitter, are conducted in silence disturbing nobody and produce zero emissions? But of course none of those things apply to you, do they? And lastly, 'registration plate'! That's just too stupid for words and categorises you more than you know.[/p][/quote]Oh the irony, a liar calling someone a liar. Burnley fan you're having a Turkish. AnotherPounding4Burnley
  • Score: -11

3:52pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Chris P Bacon says...

Manuel Hung wrote:
Er yes. Cameras are fitted. They are very common these days and not that expensive either. We no longer live in the dark ages and technology has advanced and become cheaper too. It also records in something calls 'hi definition' as well. Have a quick look on the internet thing, you will find loads of them.

There are also many more types of people than you appear to be able to think of too. Why do you believe that I am envious of cyclists?

I prefer at arrive at work or any other destination for that matter in a fresh, clean and presentable manner. Not get there, leave my sweaty clothing lying around while I get changed and then bore everyone by telling them how far you have cycled that week whilst explaining your efforts on 'strava'. (That's another technological thing that tracks your progress)

Boring, unaccountable cyclists who think they are the most important thing on the road.
I'm not disputing such cameras exist, I have front and back cameras for my bike myself. What I am disputing is where you CLAIMED to have them fitted to your vehicle then contradict yourself by claiming to have seen a 'cyclist' go through a red light yet can't come up with the evidence despite the 'cameras' you have. Very strange.

I've driven over a million business miles yet have never seen in all that time ANY cyclist go through a red light and I am most certainly claiming you haven't either. RLJ-ing is an urban myth fed by the agenda-driven Daily Heil which is swallowed by the gullible.

It has to be said that in my experience, more than 99% of vehicle drivers are exemplary when in the vicinity of cyclists. I've cycled 147 miles this weekend and have not had anything remotely approaching a regrettable incident....and then there's the tiny percentage with opinions like yours. Now that IS regrettable.

And we still await an answer to your previous claims about no 'road tax'. Conveniently forgotten about that faux-pas?
[quote][p][bold]Manuel Hung[/bold] wrote: Er yes. Cameras are fitted. They are very common these days and not that expensive either. We no longer live in the dark ages and technology has advanced and become cheaper too. It also records in something calls 'hi definition' as well. Have a quick look on the internet thing, you will find loads of them. There are also many more types of people than you appear to be able to think of too. Why do you believe that I am envious of cyclists? I prefer at arrive at work or any other destination for that matter in a fresh, clean and presentable manner. Not get there, leave my sweaty clothing lying around while I get changed and then bore everyone by telling them how far you have cycled that week whilst explaining your efforts on 'strava'. (That's another technological thing that tracks your progress) Boring, unaccountable cyclists who think they are the most important thing on the road.[/p][/quote]I'm not disputing such cameras exist, I have front and back cameras for my bike myself. What I am disputing is where you CLAIMED to have them fitted to your vehicle then contradict yourself by claiming to have seen a 'cyclist' go through a red light yet can't come up with the evidence despite the 'cameras' you have. Very strange. I've driven over a million business miles yet have never seen in all that time ANY cyclist go through a red light and I am most certainly claiming you haven't either. RLJ-ing is an urban myth fed by the agenda-driven Daily Heil which is swallowed by the gullible. It has to be said that in my experience, more than 99% of vehicle drivers are exemplary when in the vicinity of cyclists. I've cycled 147 miles this weekend and have not had anything remotely approaching a regrettable incident....and then there's the tiny percentage with opinions like yours. Now that IS regrettable. And we still await an answer to your previous claims about no 'road tax'. Conveniently forgotten about that faux-pas? Chris P Bacon
  • Score: 7

8:05pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Manuel Hung says...

Chris P Bacon wrote:
Manuel Hung wrote:
Er yes. Cameras are fitted. They are very common these days and not that expensive either. We no longer live in the dark ages and technology has advanced and become cheaper too. It also records in something calls 'hi definition' as well. Have a quick look on the internet thing, you will find loads of them.

There are also many more types of people than you appear to be able to think of too. Why do you believe that I am envious of cyclists?

I prefer at arrive at work or any other destination for that matter in a fresh, clean and presentable manner. Not get there, leave my sweaty clothing lying around while I get changed and then bore everyone by telling them how far you have cycled that week whilst explaining your efforts on 'strava'. (That's another technological thing that tracks your progress)

Boring, unaccountable cyclists who think they are the most important thing on the road.
I'm not disputing such cameras exist, I have front and back cameras for my bike myself. What I am disputing is where you CLAIMED to have them fitted to your vehicle then contradict yourself by claiming to have seen a 'cyclist' go through a red light yet can't come up with the evidence despite the 'cameras' you have. Very strange.

I've driven over a million business miles yet have never seen in all that time ANY cyclist go through a red light and I am most certainly claiming you haven't either. RLJ-ing is an urban myth fed by the agenda-driven Daily Heil which is swallowed by the gullible.

It has to be said that in my experience, more than 99% of vehicle drivers are exemplary when in the vicinity of cyclists. I've cycled 147 miles this weekend and have not had anything remotely approaching a regrettable incident....and then there's the tiny percentage with opinions like yours. Now that IS regrettable.

And we still await an answer to your previous claims about no 'road tax'. Conveniently forgotten about that faux-pas?
I fail to see why you are finding this so difficult? The cyclist went through the red light I'm assuming because he didn't want to stop and put his feet down. He kept edging forward until he was almost in the middle of the junction before the lights turned to green.

There was no one to show the footage to because the cyclist is unidentifiable.

As for the road tax issue. Emissions related tax was only introduced a few years ago. Prior to that ALL motorists had to pay it regardless or else they could not use the road network. Free loading, leftie cycling bores like you have never had to pay anything yet still moan and believe they have a right to do as they wish.
[quote][p][bold]Chris P Bacon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Manuel Hung[/bold] wrote: Er yes. Cameras are fitted. They are very common these days and not that expensive either. We no longer live in the dark ages and technology has advanced and become cheaper too. It also records in something calls 'hi definition' as well. Have a quick look on the internet thing, you will find loads of them. There are also many more types of people than you appear to be able to think of too. Why do you believe that I am envious of cyclists? I prefer at arrive at work or any other destination for that matter in a fresh, clean and presentable manner. Not get there, leave my sweaty clothing lying around while I get changed and then bore everyone by telling them how far you have cycled that week whilst explaining your efforts on 'strava'. (That's another technological thing that tracks your progress) Boring, unaccountable cyclists who think they are the most important thing on the road.[/p][/quote]I'm not disputing such cameras exist, I have front and back cameras for my bike myself. What I am disputing is where you CLAIMED to have them fitted to your vehicle then contradict yourself by claiming to have seen a 'cyclist' go through a red light yet can't come up with the evidence despite the 'cameras' you have. Very strange. I've driven over a million business miles yet have never seen in all that time ANY cyclist go through a red light and I am most certainly claiming you haven't either. RLJ-ing is an urban myth fed by the agenda-driven Daily Heil which is swallowed by the gullible. It has to be said that in my experience, more than 99% of vehicle drivers are exemplary when in the vicinity of cyclists. I've cycled 147 miles this weekend and have not had anything remotely approaching a regrettable incident....and then there's the tiny percentage with opinions like yours. Now that IS regrettable. And we still await an answer to your previous claims about no 'road tax'. Conveniently forgotten about that faux-pas?[/p][/quote]I fail to see why you are finding this so difficult? The cyclist went through the red light I'm assuming because he didn't want to stop and put his feet down. He kept edging forward until he was almost in the middle of the junction before the lights turned to green. There was no one to show the footage to because the cyclist is unidentifiable. As for the road tax issue. Emissions related tax was only introduced a few years ago. Prior to that ALL motorists had to pay it regardless or else they could not use the road network. Free loading, leftie cycling bores like you have never had to pay anything yet still moan and believe they have a right to do as they wish. Manuel Hung
  • Score: 8

7:58am Mon 9 Jun 14

Chris P Bacon says...

Manuel Hung wrote:
Chris P Bacon wrote:
Manuel Hung wrote:
Er yes. Cameras are fitted. They are very common these days and not that expensive either. We no longer live in the dark ages and technology has advanced and become cheaper too. It also records in something calls 'hi definition' as well. Have a quick look on the internet thing, you will find loads of them.

There are also many more types of people than you appear to be able to think of too. Why do you believe that I am envious of cyclists?

I prefer at arrive at work or any other destination for that matter in a fresh, clean and presentable manner. Not get there, leave my sweaty clothing lying around while I get changed and then bore everyone by telling them how far you have cycled that week whilst explaining your efforts on 'strava'. (That's another technological thing that tracks your progress)

Boring, unaccountable cyclists who think they are the most important thing on the road.
I'm not disputing such cameras exist, I have front and back cameras for my bike myself. What I am disputing is where you CLAIMED to have them fitted to your vehicle then contradict yourself by claiming to have seen a 'cyclist' go through a red light yet can't come up with the evidence despite the 'cameras' you have. Very strange.

I've driven over a million business miles yet have never seen in all that time ANY cyclist go through a red light and I am most certainly claiming you haven't either. RLJ-ing is an urban myth fed by the agenda-driven Daily Heil which is swallowed by the gullible.

It has to be said that in my experience, more than 99% of vehicle drivers are exemplary when in the vicinity of cyclists. I've cycled 147 miles this weekend and have not had anything remotely approaching a regrettable incident....and then there's the tiny percentage with opinions like yours. Now that IS regrettable.

And we still await an answer to your previous claims about no 'road tax'. Conveniently forgotten about that faux-pas?
I fail to see why you are finding this so difficult? The cyclist went through the red light I'm assuming because he didn't want to stop and put his feet down. He kept edging forward until he was almost in the middle of the junction before the lights turned to green.

There was no one to show the footage to because the cyclist is unidentifiable.

As for the road tax issue. Emissions related tax was only introduced a few years ago. Prior to that ALL motorists had to pay it regardless or else they could not use the road network. Free loading, leftie cycling bores like you have never had to pay anything yet still moan and believe they have a right to do as they wish.
No, you're wrong on EVERY SINGLE issue there.

The cyclist had a face and his bike had a brand, so therefore identifiable. If you saw it as you claim (and I'm saying you didn't - it's like people who claim to have seen the ear cut off in Reservoir Dogs - they didn't as it didn't happen) and is on the camera you claim to have (and again, I'm saying you didn't), then you'll be old-womanining it down to the cop shop to blow him up, won't you?

I'm NO 'leftie' (sic) and assure you I pay VED for both my cars so pay just as much, if not double, the amount as you pay.

If there's any bore clinging on to the wreckage of his story here, then that would be....you.
[quote][p][bold]Manuel Hung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris P Bacon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Manuel Hung[/bold] wrote: Er yes. Cameras are fitted. They are very common these days and not that expensive either. We no longer live in the dark ages and technology has advanced and become cheaper too. It also records in something calls 'hi definition' as well. Have a quick look on the internet thing, you will find loads of them. There are also many more types of people than you appear to be able to think of too. Why do you believe that I am envious of cyclists? I prefer at arrive at work or any other destination for that matter in a fresh, clean and presentable manner. Not get there, leave my sweaty clothing lying around while I get changed and then bore everyone by telling them how far you have cycled that week whilst explaining your efforts on 'strava'. (That's another technological thing that tracks your progress) Boring, unaccountable cyclists who think they are the most important thing on the road.[/p][/quote]I'm not disputing such cameras exist, I have front and back cameras for my bike myself. What I am disputing is where you CLAIMED to have them fitted to your vehicle then contradict yourself by claiming to have seen a 'cyclist' go through a red light yet can't come up with the evidence despite the 'cameras' you have. Very strange. I've driven over a million business miles yet have never seen in all that time ANY cyclist go through a red light and I am most certainly claiming you haven't either. RLJ-ing is an urban myth fed by the agenda-driven Daily Heil which is swallowed by the gullible. It has to be said that in my experience, more than 99% of vehicle drivers are exemplary when in the vicinity of cyclists. I've cycled 147 miles this weekend and have not had anything remotely approaching a regrettable incident....and then there's the tiny percentage with opinions like yours. Now that IS regrettable. And we still await an answer to your previous claims about no 'road tax'. Conveniently forgotten about that faux-pas?[/p][/quote]I fail to see why you are finding this so difficult? The cyclist went through the red light I'm assuming because he didn't want to stop and put his feet down. He kept edging forward until he was almost in the middle of the junction before the lights turned to green. There was no one to show the footage to because the cyclist is unidentifiable. As for the road tax issue. Emissions related tax was only introduced a few years ago. Prior to that ALL motorists had to pay it regardless or else they could not use the road network. Free loading, leftie cycling bores like you have never had to pay anything yet still moan and believe they have a right to do as they wish.[/p][/quote]No, you're wrong on EVERY SINGLE issue there. The cyclist had a face and his bike had a brand, so therefore identifiable. If you saw it as you claim (and I'm saying you didn't - it's like people who claim to have seen the ear cut off in Reservoir Dogs - they didn't as it didn't happen) and is on the camera you claim to have (and again, I'm saying you didn't), then you'll be old-womanining it down to the cop shop to blow him up, won't you? I'm NO 'leftie' (sic) and assure you I pay VED for both my cars so pay just as much, if not double, the amount as you pay. If there's any bore clinging on to the wreckage of his story here, then that would be....you. Chris P Bacon
  • Score: 10

8:13pm Mon 9 Jun 14

Manuel Hung says...

Chris P Bacon wrote:
Manuel Hung wrote:
Chris P Bacon wrote:
Manuel Hung wrote:
Er yes. Cameras are fitted. They are very common these days and not that expensive either. We no longer live in the dark ages and technology has advanced and become cheaper too. It also records in something calls 'hi definition' as well. Have a quick look on the internet thing, you will find loads of them.

There are also many more types of people than you appear to be able to think of too. Why do you believe that I am envious of cyclists?

I prefer at arrive at work or any other destination for that matter in a fresh, clean and presentable manner. Not get there, leave my sweaty clothing lying around while I get changed and then bore everyone by telling them how far you have cycled that week whilst explaining your efforts on 'strava'. (That's another technological thing that tracks your progress)

Boring, unaccountable cyclists who think they are the most important thing on the road.
I'm not disputing such cameras exist, I have front and back cameras for my bike myself. What I am disputing is where you CLAIMED to have them fitted to your vehicle then contradict yourself by claiming to have seen a 'cyclist' go through a red light yet can't come up with the evidence despite the 'cameras' you have. Very strange.

I've driven over a million business miles yet have never seen in all that time ANY cyclist go through a red light and I am most certainly claiming you haven't either. RLJ-ing is an urban myth fed by the agenda-driven Daily Heil which is swallowed by the gullible.

It has to be said that in my experience, more than 99% of vehicle drivers are exemplary when in the vicinity of cyclists. I've cycled 147 miles this weekend and have not had anything remotely approaching a regrettable incident....and then there's the tiny percentage with opinions like yours. Now that IS regrettable.

And we still await an answer to your previous claims about no 'road tax'. Conveniently forgotten about that faux-pas?
I fail to see why you are finding this so difficult? The cyclist went through the red light I'm assuming because he didn't want to stop and put his feet down. He kept edging forward until he was almost in the middle of the junction before the lights turned to green.

There was no one to show the footage to because the cyclist is unidentifiable.

As for the road tax issue. Emissions related tax was only introduced a few years ago. Prior to that ALL motorists had to pay it regardless or else they could not use the road network. Free loading, leftie cycling bores like you have never had to pay anything yet still moan and believe they have a right to do as they wish.
No, you're wrong on EVERY SINGLE issue there.

The cyclist had a face and his bike had a brand, so therefore identifiable. If you saw it as you claim (and I'm saying you didn't - it's like people who claim to have seen the ear cut off in Reservoir Dogs - they didn't as it didn't happen) and is on the camera you claim to have (and again, I'm saying you didn't), then you'll be old-womanining it down to the cop shop to blow him up, won't you?

I'm NO 'leftie' (sic) and assure you I pay VED for both my cars so pay just as much, if not double, the amount as you pay.

If there's any bore clinging on to the wreckage of his story here, then that would be....you.
Ok then Clouseau how do you expect the Police to identify this moronic cyclist?

"Certainly Sir, our budgets are being cut by 20% and we have lost over 500 officers over the last 4 years. We have 20 outstanding burglaries, 10 serious assaults and a couple of rapes to detect. But don't worry, we will visit every cycle shop in the country to see who bought that type of bike in the last 4 years and identify each person. Then we will interview all of them just to identify the culprit for you. Leave it with us"

GET A GRIP!

Obviously in your world no cyclist ever does anything wrong. Tell you what, pass me some of that Formica you're so fond of. I bet it tastes great?
[quote][p][bold]Chris P Bacon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Manuel Hung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chris P Bacon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Manuel Hung[/bold] wrote: Er yes. Cameras are fitted. They are very common these days and not that expensive either. We no longer live in the dark ages and technology has advanced and become cheaper too. It also records in something calls 'hi definition' as well. Have a quick look on the internet thing, you will find loads of them. There are also many more types of people than you appear to be able to think of too. Why do you believe that I am envious of cyclists? I prefer at arrive at work or any other destination for that matter in a fresh, clean and presentable manner. Not get there, leave my sweaty clothing lying around while I get changed and then bore everyone by telling them how far you have cycled that week whilst explaining your efforts on 'strava'. (That's another technological thing that tracks your progress) Boring, unaccountable cyclists who think they are the most important thing on the road.[/p][/quote]I'm not disputing such cameras exist, I have front and back cameras for my bike myself. What I am disputing is where you CLAIMED to have them fitted to your vehicle then contradict yourself by claiming to have seen a 'cyclist' go through a red light yet can't come up with the evidence despite the 'cameras' you have. Very strange. I've driven over a million business miles yet have never seen in all that time ANY cyclist go through a red light and I am most certainly claiming you haven't either. RLJ-ing is an urban myth fed by the agenda-driven Daily Heil which is swallowed by the gullible. It has to be said that in my experience, more than 99% of vehicle drivers are exemplary when in the vicinity of cyclists. I've cycled 147 miles this weekend and have not had anything remotely approaching a regrettable incident....and then there's the tiny percentage with opinions like yours. Now that IS regrettable. And we still await an answer to your previous claims about no 'road tax'. Conveniently forgotten about that faux-pas?[/p][/quote]I fail to see why you are finding this so difficult? The cyclist went through the red light I'm assuming because he didn't want to stop and put his feet down. He kept edging forward until he was almost in the middle of the junction before the lights turned to green. There was no one to show the footage to because the cyclist is unidentifiable. As for the road tax issue. Emissions related tax was only introduced a few years ago. Prior to that ALL motorists had to pay it regardless or else they could not use the road network. Free loading, leftie cycling bores like you have never had to pay anything yet still moan and believe they have a right to do as they wish.[/p][/quote]No, you're wrong on EVERY SINGLE issue there. The cyclist had a face and his bike had a brand, so therefore identifiable. If you saw it as you claim (and I'm saying you didn't - it's like people who claim to have seen the ear cut off in Reservoir Dogs - they didn't as it didn't happen) and is on the camera you claim to have (and again, I'm saying you didn't), then you'll be old-womanining it down to the cop shop to blow him up, won't you? I'm NO 'leftie' (sic) and assure you I pay VED for both my cars so pay just as much, if not double, the amount as you pay. If there's any bore clinging on to the wreckage of his story here, then that would be....you.[/p][/quote]Ok then Clouseau how do you expect the Police to identify this moronic cyclist? "Certainly Sir, our budgets are being cut by 20% and we have lost over 500 officers over the last 4 years. We have 20 outstanding burglaries, 10 serious assaults and a couple of rapes to detect. But don't worry, we will visit every cycle shop in the country to see who bought that type of bike in the last 4 years and identify each person. Then we will interview all of them just to identify the culprit for you. Leave it with us" GET A GRIP! Obviously in your world no cyclist ever does anything wrong. Tell you what, pass me some of that Formica you're so fond of. I bet it tastes great? Manuel Hung
  • Score: 14

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree