Great post. You'll be pleased to know I've been riding more responsibly since that day I almost caused you to run me over.

FWIW I think 'arsehole' is the stronger term.

Well said. I get just as frustrated with cyclists doing stupid things as I do with motorists and pedestrians, though I'd say that on average, here in Adelaide, I probably see each in about equal numbers .... I guess it's a common trait of humanity rather than their choice of transport.

I actually agree with you, cyclists, like all road users must obey the road rules.
But, as I have said before, in order to fnd solutions to problems you first have to understand what the problem is.
In the case of bunch rides, stopping is a problem, especially at speed. Perhaps Beach Road is just an inappropriate place for bunch rides, or perhaps pedestrians need to have a better way to cross the street, eg, an overpass or a tunnel.
There are very few legitimate reasons for commuting cyclists to flaut the laws, although stopping distances are still an issue for cyclists with rim brakes travelling at speed.

I can't believe you are advocating an pedestrian overpass here. In your blog and comments on others, you state that cyclists shouldn't be forced into "segregated facilities" when it's motorists that won't share the road. Yet here, when it's the cyclists not playing by the rules you are suggesting exactly what a lot of drivers want for cyclists....get them off the road!

No, what I'm suggesting is that we find out what the problem is and try to find a solution to the problem that actually exists.
I deplore the notion of segregation of bicycles on the basis that bicycles are legal road vehicles (as long as they obey the road rules) and that segregation reinforces the idea in the minds of motorists that bicycles do not belong on our roads. And to clarify, I want to see more cyclists on the road, I have never stated that I want to get cyclists off the road.
A footpath is designed to segregate pedestrians (who are not defined as legal road users) from legal road using vehicles. An overpass might supply them with a safer method of crossing the road, IF that is the problem. IF the problem is cyclists ignoring the road rules then placing a few police on the road at the appropriate times and fining all law-breakers might be a solution. IF the stopping distance of bicycles is the problem then the solution might lie in enforcing a speed limit (assuming that would apply equally to all road users). IF the problem is topography of the site, ie, it's hard for a cyclist to see the traffic lights, then perhaps the traffic lights and pedestrian crossing could be moved to a better location.
There is nothing unusual in this suggestion of trying to find the cause and then trying to find a solution. We've been analysing motor vehicle accident statistics for years in order to try to understand the problems and find solutions. Seatbelts, random breath-testing, and reduced speed limits all have their basis in this type of analysis. Accidents involving bicycles should be treated no differently.

The answer in all cases - and for all road users - is to "drive appropriately for the prevailing conditions (for example, weather, driving surface, other users) ".

When I started, meant, ignited, that aus.bicycle thread, I *really* didn't expect such a bizarre response.

Mortifying reflections anyone?

A very sensible comment Lelak. Not something that is transferable into law, however, which is why we make up all those hundreds of road rules.
So, in this particular instance, it appears that the cyclist and, from The Age's report today, other cyclists, failed to stop at a red light. The question for me becomes why didn't they stop. Once we understand the "why" we can start to think about "what" to do in order to try to reduce the probablity of the same thing happening again.

I think the why is pretty obvious. They think the red doesn't or shouldn't apply to them.

Pedaller, overpasses are incredibly expensive, not to mention being a poor solution given the limited foot traffic in the area. Policing the hell-ride is near impossible; that in itself is one of the reasons it has become a vehicle for illegal behaviour. Partially, or fully closing Beach Road to traffic and turning off the lights on a Saturday would be more feasible, but that still needs good faith, and that is lacking for obvious reasons.

However, none of that gets around the fundamental point Lelak made. If stopping distance is a problem in a bunch, then riders need to be more responsible and aware; a bunch is not dissimilar to a driver tail-gating, and almost as dangerous. If you want the authorities to find solutions, then a ban on riding in a large group is likely.

You might be right Damian. But it could also be, for instance, that they didn't see the lights change in time, or that they couldn't stop in time. Without identifying the root cause(s) we cannot implement appropriate solutions.

I sincerely hope you are not right Russ, I think it would be sad to try to ban bunch rides, and hard for competitive cyclists to train. It may be that Beach Road is just not suitable for bunch rides, but surely other, more suitable locations can be found.
But it comes back, once again, to the need to study the problem rather than assuming we know what the problem is and present solutions based on that assumption. If the solution is based on a false premise then we end up not solving the problem at all.

Perhaps, perhaps not. I sincerely doubt you will find a better road in inner/middle Melbourne than Beach Rd., it is basically flat, wide, straight and relatively low in traffic. However, while it might be an over-reaction, a ban on bunch rides in built up areas would reinforce the case for dedicated space/time for sporting cyclists (much like banning skaters from the steps of public buildings).

It really isn't in anyone's interest to have a running battle with the authorities. If cycling in large bunches is incompatible with sensible road-use (and elements of it are) then formalising and controlling it might be a better outcome for everyone.

I agree if it gets left to the government agencies, the only solution is to ban unauthorised "racing." You'll see a comparision drawn between the right of cyclists to "race" on public roads and the right of motorists to use public roads for sport .

Oh and this Mark Horner person - IS a dickhead!

Expect the unexpected....every time you ride a bike or drive on the road....then and only then will you at least be ready to take necesary action.
In every aspect of life wheter it be business, family relationships, our health whatever, when we makle assumptions, we get the real Ass U & me outcome.....

Not all cyclists are didckheads, some are and will never change, not all drivers are dickheads...some are and will never change.... personal responsibility is a good place to start, accept the responsibility to be properly skilled and competent to ride or drive...accept the responsibility to keep a proper look out and obey the law...then unless it is an engine falling of a plane overhead that gets you, there is a good chance you will go through life ith minimal mishap, as a rider and driver.
I am upset at the loss of a life...I am sure the cyclist who hit the old gent is also now quite moved and more than upset, and whilst that doesnt replace a life, it does do some good ... but regrettably, the vigilantes will be out fueled by amedia feeding franzy...keep this in perspective...it is a sad laoos, a rare occasion, statistically had to happen...that the hell ride was in the vicinity and connected, in many ways is a good thing as it hammers the message that unkilled, unobservant, self centred road users can cause death.
As a society we benefit from the good cycling can bring...so be aware, responsible, law abiding and careful!
Anything less is being a dickhead!

pardon my spell checking, but bloggs are immediate and emotive...

I ride, I vote (sometimes), I goat...

It's pretty frustrating when you do the right thing and so many others don't. I was in a club ride along Beach Road a couple of weeks ago and we were able to organise ourselves into small bunches and even stop at trafic lights. It didn't slow us down much and it wasn't a big deal. Some of these frustrated cafe racers who think they're in the Tour de France would be worth of a laugh, if one of their number hadn't just killed someone. Public roads are no place to race: cars or motorcycles or bicycles.

or pedestrians ;-)

What I don't understand is why cyclists wear racing gear when the a riding their bikes?

Who are the idiots racing?

Why do people wear running shoes to go jogging, they aren't racing ?

The right gear makes it more comfortable to ride, it's not really a difficult concept.

your all wankers, its not fair to judge all cyclists by a few wronge riders,

I got hit by a car and the idiot driver was at fault, he cost me $600 and he didnt even stop

Dont think its just us, sure we sometimes get exited but dont think for a second that you drivers are perfect eather, i get cut off i get sworn at and abbussed and thats just the start

Teehee

Perhaps a little more reading comprehension is required ?

I am a cyclist, this blog is from the point of view of a cyclist.