The world has gone mad!
Discussion
Just seen this story on the BBC New website (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25926572) where the Advertising Standards Authority banned advert aimed at make drivers aware of cyclists because they weren't happy with the way one of the cyclists in the advert was riding.
FFS, still nice Merc though.
FFS, still nice Merc though.
Absolutely shameful. The ASA just don't get it. The whole point of staying out further from the kerb in some situations is to force cars to pass safely and not squeeze past.
And since when are they supposed to be enforcing "recommendations" from the highway code?
I think Cycling Scotland should create another ad highlighting the dangers of gutter cycling.
And since when are they supposed to be enforcing "recommendations" from the highway code?
I think Cycling Scotland should create another ad highlighting the dangers of gutter cycling.
I think I recall seeing the original 'ad' linked from PH. The petty mindedness of the 5 (yup, as few as 5 viewers complained about the 'ad' 
) complainants is outdone in this case only by the pathetic response from the ASA.
The offending scene. (Bear in mind that, because it is a film shoot, the 'Benz is not only overtaking the cyclist, but also a camera car, which means that in order to do so safely it needs to move out further than it normally might)
Now pardon my ignorance, but the bloody car SHOULD move across into the opposing traffic lane if that is what it takes to pass a cyclist safely, and if it isn't safe to move across and complete a PROPER overtake, then they should damned well wait.
Are the ASA now going to turn their attention to this image...
...which is straight from HM Government's very own Highway Code?
The HC image clearly instructs drivers to give cyclists as much space when overtaking as they would a car, and this would in almost all cases, on Single Carriageway roads, mean a brief excursion onto the lane set aside for traffic travelling in the opposite direction. The only reason the 'Benz in the still from the 'ad' got away with remaining on the left side of the line was the rarely seen absolutely massive width of the road at that point, meaning that there was plenty of space for the cyclist to stay out of the gutter, and for the car to pass her safely with room to spare.
The world has indeed gone stark raving bonkers.
) complainants is outdone in this case only by the pathetic response from the ASA.The ASA said:
"Furthermore, we were concerned that whilst the cyclist was more than 0.5 metres from the kerb, they appeared to be located more in the centre of the lane when the car behind overtook them and the car almost had to enter the right lane of traffic.
The offending scene. (Bear in mind that, because it is a film shoot, the 'Benz is not only overtaking the cyclist, but also a camera car, which means that in order to do so safely it needs to move out further than it normally might)
Now pardon my ignorance, but the bloody car SHOULD move across into the opposing traffic lane if that is what it takes to pass a cyclist safely, and if it isn't safe to move across and complete a PROPER overtake, then they should damned well wait.
Are the ASA now going to turn their attention to this image...
...which is straight from HM Government's very own Highway Code?
The HC image clearly instructs drivers to give cyclists as much space when overtaking as they would a car, and this would in almost all cases, on Single Carriageway roads, mean a brief excursion onto the lane set aside for traffic travelling in the opposite direction. The only reason the 'Benz in the still from the 'ad' got away with remaining on the left side of the line was the rarely seen absolutely massive width of the road at that point, meaning that there was plenty of space for the cyclist to stay out of the gutter, and for the car to pass her safely with room to spare.
The world has indeed gone stark raving bonkers.
Vipers said:
SEE CYCLIST THINK HORSE
That conveys absolutely nothing to me. Mind you I havnt seen the live add, may there was more to it.
Here... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELId66LUupw ...is a link to the original 'ad'. That conveys absolutely nothing to me. Mind you I havnt seen the live add, may there was more to it.
(Don't come crying to me when you realise that it's 43 seconds of your life you'll never get back
)yellowjack said:
Vipers said:
SEE CYCLIST THINK HORSE
That conveys absolutely nothing to me. Mind you I havnt seen the live add, may there was more to it.
Here... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELId66LUupw ...is a link to the original 'ad'. That conveys absolutely nothing to me. Mind you I havnt seen the live add, may there was more to it.
(Don't come crying to me when you realise that it's 43 seconds of your life you'll never get back
)
yellowjack said:
I think I recall seeing the original 'ad' linked from PH. The petty mindedness of the 5 (yup, as few as 5 viewers complained about the 'ad' ) complainants is outdone in this case only by the pathetic response from the ASA.
The offending scene. (Bear in mind that, because it is a film shoot, the 'Benz is not only overtaking the cyclist, but also a camera car, which means that in order to do so safely it needs to move out further than it normally might)
Now pardon my ignorance, but the bloody car SHOULD move across into the opposing traffic lane if that is what it takes to pass a cyclist safely, and if it isn't safe to move across and complete a PROPER overtake, then they should damned well wait.
Are the ASA now going to turn their attention to this image...
...which is straight from HM Government's very own Highway Code?
The HC image clearly instructs drivers to give cyclists as much space when overtaking as they would a car, and this would in almost all cases, on Single Carriageway roads, mean a brief excursion onto the lane set aside for traffic travelling in the opposite direction. The only reason the 'Benz in the still from the 'ad' got away with remaining on the left side of the line was the rarely seen absolutely massive width of the road at that point, meaning that there was plenty of space for the cyclist to stay out of the gutter, and for the car to pass her safely with room to spare.
The world has indeed gone stark raving bonkers.
but then you have roads like this... ) complainants is outdone in this case only by the pathetic response from the ASA.The ASA said:
"Furthermore, we were concerned that whilst the cyclist was more than 0.5 metres from the kerb, they appeared to be located more in the centre of the lane when the car behind overtook them and the car almost had to enter the right lane of traffic.
The offending scene. (Bear in mind that, because it is a film shoot, the 'Benz is not only overtaking the cyclist, but also a camera car, which means that in order to do so safely it needs to move out further than it normally might)
Now pardon my ignorance, but the bloody car SHOULD move across into the opposing traffic lane if that is what it takes to pass a cyclist safely, and if it isn't safe to move across and complete a PROPER overtake, then they should damned well wait.
Are the ASA now going to turn their attention to this image...
...which is straight from HM Government's very own Highway Code?
The HC image clearly instructs drivers to give cyclists as much space when overtaking as they would a car, and this would in almost all cases, on Single Carriageway roads, mean a brief excursion onto the lane set aside for traffic travelling in the opposite direction. The only reason the 'Benz in the still from the 'ad' got away with remaining on the left side of the line was the rarely seen absolutely massive width of the road at that point, meaning that there was plenty of space for the cyclist to stay out of the gutter, and for the car to pass her safely with room to spare.
The world has indeed gone stark raving bonkers.
https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?ll=51.576423,0.0581...
seems to indicate that you don't need to leave over a car's width whilst overtaking?
irocfan said:
but then you have roads like this...
https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?ll=51.576423,0.0581...
seems to indicate that you don't need to leave over a car's width whilst overtaking?
...AND they want you to ride in the door zone. Lethal. https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?ll=51.576423,0.0581...
seems to indicate that you don't need to leave over a car's width whilst overtaking?
te. So I fail to see how this might help her?Fotic said:
TKF said:
Ridiculous road positioning on her part.
She's just returned from a tour of Afghan where she walked towards danger, not away from. She's not in the regular army....
Still want to question her positioning wink face?
Don't think so.
Unless you are saying shes TA?
Forums | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff