'Cyclist injured' in sabotaged New Forest bike event

Daily Echo: 'Cyclist injured' in sabotaged bike ride 'Cyclist injured' in sabotaged bike ride

A ROW surrounding the sabotage of one of Hampshire’s biggest cycling events increased last night after claims that a rider fell and broke his collarbone after riding over drawing pins deliberately placed on the route.

Organisers of Cycling UK’s Wiggle New Forest Spring Sportive swept the tacks off a stretch of road near Boldre on Saturday before 1,850 riders set off on the two-day ride.

Cycling UK initially said that the event – which was cancelled on its second day due to waterlogged ground – passed injury free, although many participants suffered punctures while tackling the swept stretch of road.

But comments posted on the Daily Echo’s website claimed that a man had fallen from his bike while using the same route to get to work earlier that day.

Mystery surrounds the injured man’s identity, but a reader posting under the name cyclejim wrote: “His wheel caught one of a number of tacks thrown onto that particular part of the road, which blew his tyre and caused him to fall and break his collarbone.

“I hope whoever did that is satisfied.

“Who has been causing the real danger on Forest roads this weekend?”

The comments stirred a debate on national cycling websites, but yesterday police and ambulance services said that the incident had not been reported to them.

Related links

UK Cycling director Martin Barden, whose teams also had to replace 1,000 direction and safety signs which had been torn down or defaced, said: “My thoughts go out to him – it’s obviously dreadful and this is not just fun and games it is putting people’s lives in danger.

“Normally locals welcome us and have been very supportive but we are talking about a very small minority of protesters and a handful of hardcore vigilantes causing mayhem.”

He added: “Their aim was to protect the Forest but chucking down tacks doesn’t just endanger cyclists and motorists, it hurts Forest animals too.”

Chief Inspector Tony Rowlinson said that the police were trying to track down who had placed the tacks.

He said: “We support people’s rights to lawful, peaceful protest but for those that break the law we will take action.

“We are now following up on information to find those responsible for the criminal damage caused during the Sportive.”

South Central Ambulance spokesman James Keating-Wilkes said that the only injury crews dealt with was of a 50-year-old woman who fell off her bike at 12.20pm on Saturday and was taken to Poole Hospital with a suspected hip injury.

Comments (31)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:13am Tue 16 Apr 13

ToastyTea says...

Even though bit harsh he broke his collar bone it is quite funny at the same time.
Even though bit harsh he broke his collar bone it is quite funny at the same time. ToastyTea

11:26am Tue 16 Apr 13

bigfella777 says...

ToastyTea wrote:
Even though bit harsh he broke his collar bone it is quite funny at the same time.
How on earth is breaking a collar bone funny?
[quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: Even though bit harsh he broke his collar bone it is quite funny at the same time.[/p][/quote]How on earth is breaking a collar bone funny? bigfella777

11:31am Tue 16 Apr 13

ToastyTea says...

bigfella777 wrote:
ToastyTea wrote: Even though bit harsh he broke his collar bone it is quite funny at the same time.
How on earth is breaking a collar bone funny?
It's funny that somebody put pins down, locals gone crazy.
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: Even though bit harsh he broke his collar bone it is quite funny at the same time.[/p][/quote]How on earth is breaking a collar bone funny?[/p][/quote]It's funny that somebody put pins down, locals gone crazy. ToastyTea

11:33am Tue 16 Apr 13

Torchie1 says...

A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name.
A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name. Torchie1

11:34am Tue 16 Apr 13

CharlieOxbridge says...

bigfella777 wrote:
ToastyTea wrote: Even though bit harsh he broke his collar bone it is quite funny at the same time.
How on earth is breaking a collar bone funny?
The funny bone is not a bone it is a nerve!
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: Even though bit harsh he broke his collar bone it is quite funny at the same time.[/p][/quote]How on earth is breaking a collar bone funny?[/p][/quote]The funny bone is not a bone it is a nerve! CharlieOxbridge

11:38am Tue 16 Apr 13

CharlieOxbridge says...

Torchie1 wrote:
A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name.
I must admit I think it is very dangerous to print articles on the basis of an anonymous comment on a news article, if that is the case here? I would assume that they did actually contact the user to confirm that this was genuine, otherwise just imagine the reports that would get published on the basis of what Southy writes!!!
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name.[/p][/quote]I must admit I think it is very dangerous to print articles on the basis of an anonymous comment on a news article, if that is the case here? I would assume that they did actually contact the user to confirm that this was genuine, otherwise just imagine the reports that would get published on the basis of what Southy writes!!! CharlieOxbridge

11:46am Tue 16 Apr 13

OSPREYSAINT says...

ToastyTea wrote:
bigfella777 wrote:
ToastyTea wrote: Even though bit harsh he broke his collar bone it is quite funny at the same time.
How on earth is breaking a collar bone funny?
It's funny that somebody put pins down, locals gone crazy.
It isn't funny at all, it is crass stupidity of the highest order, it doesn't just affect cyclists, the wildlife and peoples pets could be hurt too.
[quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: Even though bit harsh he broke his collar bone it is quite funny at the same time.[/p][/quote]How on earth is breaking a collar bone funny?[/p][/quote]It's funny that somebody put pins down, locals gone crazy.[/p][/quote]It isn't funny at all, it is crass stupidity of the highest order, it doesn't just affect cyclists, the wildlife and peoples pets could be hurt too. OSPREYSAINT

12:15pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Torchie1 says...

CharlieOxbridge wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name.
I must admit I think it is very dangerous to print articles on the basis of an anonymous comment on a news article, if that is the case here? I would assume that they did actually contact the user to confirm that this was genuine, otherwise just imagine the reports that would get published on the basis of what Southy writes!!!
I would like to think that someone tried to verify the tale but would they then have gone on to write "Mystery surrounds the injured man’s identity, but a reader posting under the name cyclejim "?
[quote][p][bold]CharlieOxbridge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name.[/p][/quote]I must admit I think it is very dangerous to print articles on the basis of an anonymous comment on a news article, if that is the case here? I would assume that they did actually contact the user to confirm that this was genuine, otherwise just imagine the reports that would get published on the basis of what Southy writes!!![/p][/quote]I would like to think that someone tried to verify the tale but would they then have gone on to write "Mystery surrounds the injured man’s identity, but a reader posting under the name cyclejim "? Torchie1

12:34pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Ciaran says...

Torchie1 wrote:
CharlieOxbridge wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name.
I must admit I think it is very dangerous to print articles on the basis of an anonymous comment on a news article, if that is the case here? I would assume that they did actually contact the user to confirm that this was genuine, otherwise just imagine the reports that would get published on the basis of what Southy writes!!!
I would like to think that someone tried to verify the tale but would they then have gone on to write "Mystery surrounds the injured man’s identity, but a reader posting under the name cyclejim "?
Well seeing as they've clearly asked the police and ambulance service about it, I think it's quite clear they've tried to get to the bottom of it.

You could of course just email the bloke who wrote it and ask him - his details are at the top of the story.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CharlieOxbridge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name.[/p][/quote]I must admit I think it is very dangerous to print articles on the basis of an anonymous comment on a news article, if that is the case here? I would assume that they did actually contact the user to confirm that this was genuine, otherwise just imagine the reports that would get published on the basis of what Southy writes!!![/p][/quote]I would like to think that someone tried to verify the tale but would they then have gone on to write "Mystery surrounds the injured man’s identity, but a reader posting under the name cyclejim "?[/p][/quote]Well seeing as they've clearly asked the police and ambulance service about it, I think it's quite clear they've tried to get to the bottom of it. You could of course just email the bloke who wrote it and ask him - his details are at the top of the story. Ciaran

1:12pm Tue 16 Apr 13

retry69 says...

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
ToastyTea wrote:
bigfella777 wrote:
ToastyTea wrote: Even though bit harsh he broke his collar bone it is quite funny at the same time.
How on earth is breaking a collar bone funny?
It's funny that somebody put pins down, locals gone crazy.
It isn't funny at all, it is crass stupidity of the highest order, it doesn't just affect cyclists, the wildlife and peoples pets could be hurt too.
Exactly! putting aside any differences between road users,anyone involved in this stupidity should be dealt with severely
[quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote: Even though bit harsh he broke his collar bone it is quite funny at the same time.[/p][/quote]How on earth is breaking a collar bone funny?[/p][/quote]It's funny that somebody put pins down, locals gone crazy.[/p][/quote]It isn't funny at all, it is crass stupidity of the highest order, it doesn't just affect cyclists, the wildlife and peoples pets could be hurt too.[/p][/quote]Exactly! putting aside any differences between road users,anyone involved in this stupidity should be dealt with severely retry69

1:14pm Tue 16 Apr 13

GarethS998 says...

In the other article the Echo quoted cyclejim and asked him to get his friend to contact them. I feel they have run with the story as an "alleged" item to either prompt the injured person to get into contact or even just to raise awareness of what could have happened.

I find it intriguing that this alleged injury occurred to someone who appeared to live within or near the New Forest as they were apparently cycling to work in cyclejim's comment.

Also if this person did sustain a fractured or broken collarbone depending on its severity this might be the last thing on his mind. I ended up with a shattered collarbone (broken into three separate sections) last year and I wouldn't have been wanting to speak to the paper the following day while waiting for my fracture clinic appointment and knowing it was a definite surgery job. Bear in mind the whole "put it in a sling and give it a few weeks" is for a standard fracture ... Ambulance service nor police were involved in my injury, I was riding with friends and one of them had his wife collect us then took me to A&E so it's entirely possible the local A&E knows about this but the ambulance service don't ... Though to be fair having seen these articles if I was this injured person I would have been in contact with the local police!
In the other article the Echo quoted cyclejim and asked him to get his friend to contact them. I feel they have run with the story as an "alleged" item to either prompt the injured person to get into contact or even just to raise awareness of what could have happened. I find it intriguing that this alleged injury occurred to someone who appeared to live within or near the New Forest as they were apparently cycling to work in cyclejim's comment. Also if this person did sustain a fractured or broken collarbone depending on its severity this might be the last thing on his mind. I ended up with a shattered collarbone (broken into three separate sections) last year and I wouldn't have been wanting to speak to the paper the following day while waiting for my fracture clinic appointment and knowing it was a definite surgery job. Bear in mind the whole "put it in a sling and give it a few weeks" is for a standard fracture ... Ambulance service nor police were involved in my injury, I was riding with friends and one of them had his wife collect us then took me to A&E so it's entirely possible the local A&E knows about this but the ambulance service don't ... Though to be fair having seen these articles if I was this injured person I would have been in contact with the local police! GarethS998

1:59pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Bally_Hoo says...

Dogs being poisoned, cyclists being targeted by saboutage, are New Forest residents deliberatly trying to scare people away?

Seriuosly though, whoever did this is just a terrorist, causing injury to harm, scare and disrupt, terrorism pure and simple.
Dogs being poisoned, cyclists being targeted by saboutage, are New Forest residents deliberatly trying to scare people away? Seriuosly though, whoever did this is just a terrorist, causing injury to harm, scare and disrupt, terrorism pure and simple. Bally_Hoo

2:02pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Torchie1 says...

Ciaran wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
CharlieOxbridge wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name.
I must admit I think it is very dangerous to print articles on the basis of an anonymous comment on a news article, if that is the case here? I would assume that they did actually contact the user to confirm that this was genuine, otherwise just imagine the reports that would get published on the basis of what Southy writes!!!
I would like to think that someone tried to verify the tale but would they then have gone on to write "Mystery surrounds the injured man’s identity, but a reader posting under the name cyclejim "?
Well seeing as they've clearly asked the police and ambulance service about it, I think it's quite clear they've tried to get to the bottom of it.

You could of course just email the bloke who wrote it and ask him - his details are at the top of the story.
I could email the reporter as you suggest but why would he confide in me who he doesn't know from Adam and risk me filling in the gaps in the story when he could have made the disclosure himself? I'm moving towards the conclusion that it's a yarn made up to garner sympathy for the weekend cyclists and it's got out of hand.
[quote][p][bold]Ciaran[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CharlieOxbridge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name.[/p][/quote]I must admit I think it is very dangerous to print articles on the basis of an anonymous comment on a news article, if that is the case here? I would assume that they did actually contact the user to confirm that this was genuine, otherwise just imagine the reports that would get published on the basis of what Southy writes!!![/p][/quote]I would like to think that someone tried to verify the tale but would they then have gone on to write "Mystery surrounds the injured man’s identity, but a reader posting under the name cyclejim "?[/p][/quote]Well seeing as they've clearly asked the police and ambulance service about it, I think it's quite clear they've tried to get to the bottom of it. You could of course just email the bloke who wrote it and ask him - his details are at the top of the story.[/p][/quote]I could email the reporter as you suggest but why would he confide in me who he doesn't know from Adam and risk me filling in the gaps in the story when he could have made the disclosure himself? I'm moving towards the conclusion that it's a yarn made up to garner sympathy for the weekend cyclists and it's got out of hand. Torchie1

2:12pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Ciaran says...

So rather than even try and get a definitive answer you'd prefer to cast aspersions and assumptions?

That speaks volumes, if you ask me.
So rather than even try and get a definitive answer you'd prefer to cast aspersions and assumptions? That speaks volumes, if you ask me. Ciaran

3:09pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Torchie1 says...

Ciaran wrote:
So rather than even try and get a definitive answer you'd prefer to cast aspersions and assumptions?

That speaks volumes, if you ask me.
What speaks volumes is you suggesting I contact a reporter to ask him for information that he has chosen not to print so again I ask, why would he confide this information to an unknown third party. I know that I won't get any more answers but you don't seem so sure so why don't you send the email and publish the reply if you're that confident of your own beliefs.
[quote][p][bold]Ciaran[/bold] wrote: So rather than even try and get a definitive answer you'd prefer to cast aspersions and assumptions? That speaks volumes, if you ask me.[/p][/quote]What speaks volumes is you suggesting I contact a reporter to ask him for information that he has chosen not to print so again I ask, why would he confide this information to an unknown third party. I know that I won't get any more answers but you don't seem so sure so why don't you send the email and publish the reply if you're that confident of your own beliefs. Torchie1

3:52pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Alfonso999 says...

Ciaran wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
CharlieOxbridge wrote:
Torchie1 wrote: A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name.
I must admit I think it is very dangerous to print articles on the basis of an anonymous comment on a news article, if that is the case here? I would assume that they did actually contact the user to confirm that this was genuine, otherwise just imagine the reports that would get published on the basis of what Southy writes!!!
I would like to think that someone tried to verify the tale but would they then have gone on to write "Mystery surrounds the injured man’s identity, but a reader posting under the name cyclejim "?
Well seeing as they've clearly asked the police and ambulance service about it, I think it's quite clear they've tried to get to the bottom of it. You could of course just email the bloke who wrote it and ask him - his details are at the top of the story.
If someone was injured then I am sorry but the cyclist needs to identify himself/herself? to validate this story.Injured cyclist if you are reading this then I hope you soon recover and I am truly sorry that you are injured.Did anyone else see the tacks apart from the organisers?..and really 1,000 signs removed-that would have to be the work of an organised chain gang!.How many signs were there in the first place??..and NO I don't condone either action if true.This sad situation is down to greed on the organisers part who just 'pack 'em in' at any cost at everyone elses expense,because they get their money up front and because there is no legal restriction on numbers or how they run the event.If you look at the organiser's FB page most entrants are pretty pe...d off that there are no refunds for the postponed Sunday and because most of them have booked their rides for the season they don't want an alternative date. 2000+ @ £28 each?,Yes please nice money if you can get it!!Many of the cyclists are really nice people who want a nice day out in a lovely area and they are VERY WELCOME,but, there is a hard core cycling faction who attend these events (often entered on both days) to 'race' each other and these are rather unpleasant on or out of the saddle.I have a picture of three of them giving me a rude sign whilst riding on the wrong side of a white line.The numbers on the bikes are too small for the naked eye to read at speed - but thank you Photoshop:)At the end of the day it is the organiser who is legally responsible if something goes wrong despite what their T's&C's say.They should stop sensationalising and stop trying to cause trouble and start being responsible and face up to the problem they've created.However,whil
st the authorities let them,they will just keep on taking the money.Cyclists don't get taken for a mug come and enjoy the beautiful New Forest whenever you want and it's FREE - unless of course your agenda is to 'race' and that's why you need to ride in an organised 'Sportive'.Most cyclists are great but the sport is littered with baddies such as Lance Armstrong.i.e. older guys who have to take anabolic steroids and drugs like EPO to keep up with the naturally athletic and fit young ones.
[quote][p][bold]Ciaran[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CharlieOxbridge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name.[/p][/quote]I must admit I think it is very dangerous to print articles on the basis of an anonymous comment on a news article, if that is the case here? I would assume that they did actually contact the user to confirm that this was genuine, otherwise just imagine the reports that would get published on the basis of what Southy writes!!![/p][/quote]I would like to think that someone tried to verify the tale but would they then have gone on to write "Mystery surrounds the injured man’s identity, but a reader posting under the name cyclejim "?[/p][/quote]Well seeing as they've clearly asked the police and ambulance service about it, I think it's quite clear they've tried to get to the bottom of it. You could of course just email the bloke who wrote it and ask him - his details are at the top of the story.[/p][/quote]If someone was injured then I am sorry but the cyclist needs to identify himself/herself? to validate this story.Injured cyclist if you are reading this then I hope you soon recover and I am truly sorry that you are injured.Did anyone else see the tacks apart from the organisers?..and really 1,000 signs removed-that would have to be the work of an organised chain gang!.How many signs were there in the first place??..and NO I don't condone either action if true.This sad situation is down to greed on the organisers part who just 'pack 'em in' at any cost at everyone elses expense,because they get their money up front and because there is no legal restriction on numbers or how they run the event.If you look at the organiser's FB page most entrants are pretty pe...d off that there are no refunds for the postponed Sunday and because most of them have booked their rides for the season they don't want an alternative date. 2000+ @ £28 each?,Yes please nice money if you can get it!!Many of the cyclists are really nice people who want a nice day out in a lovely area and they are VERY WELCOME,but, there is a hard core cycling faction who attend these events (often entered on both days) to 'race' each other and these are rather unpleasant on or out of the saddle.I have a picture of three of them giving me a rude sign whilst riding on the wrong side of a white line.The numbers on the bikes are too small for the naked eye to read at speed - but thank you Photoshop:)At the end of the day it is the organiser who is legally responsible if something goes wrong despite what their T's&C's say.They should stop sensationalising and stop trying to cause trouble and start being responsible and face up to the problem they've created.However,whil st the authorities let them,they will just keep on taking the money.Cyclists don't get taken for a mug come and enjoy the beautiful New Forest whenever you want and it's FREE - unless of course your agenda is to 'race' and that's why you need to ride in an organised 'Sportive'.Most cyclists are great but the sport is littered with baddies such as Lance Armstrong.i.e. older guys who have to take anabolic steroids and drugs like EPO to keep up with the naturally athletic and fit young ones. Alfonso999

4:30pm Tue 16 Apr 13

owen_thesaints says...

Alfonso999 wrote:
Ciaran wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
CharlieOxbridge wrote:
Torchie1 wrote: A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name.
I must admit I think it is very dangerous to print articles on the basis of an anonymous comment on a news article, if that is the case here? I would assume that they did actually contact the user to confirm that this was genuine, otherwise just imagine the reports that would get published on the basis of what Southy writes!!!
I would like to think that someone tried to verify the tale but would they then have gone on to write "Mystery surrounds the injured man’s identity, but a reader posting under the name cyclejim "?
Well seeing as they've clearly asked the police and ambulance service about it, I think it's quite clear they've tried to get to the bottom of it. You could of course just email the bloke who wrote it and ask him - his details are at the top of the story.
If someone was injured then I am sorry but the cyclist needs to identify himself/herself? to validate this story.Injured cyclist if you are reading this then I hope you soon recover and I am truly sorry that you are injured.Did anyone else see the tacks apart from the organisers?..and really 1,000 signs removed-that would have to be the work of an organised chain gang!.How many signs were there in the first place??..and NO I don't condone either action if true.This sad situation is down to greed on the organisers part who just 'pack 'em in' at any cost at everyone elses expense,because they get their money up front and because there is no legal restriction on numbers or how they run the event.If you look at the organiser's FB page most entrants are pretty pe...d off that there are no refunds for the postponed Sunday and because most of them have booked their rides for the season they don't want an alternative date. 2000+ @ £28 each?,Yes please nice money if you can get it!!Many of the cyclists are really nice people who want a nice day out in a lovely area and they are VERY WELCOME,but, there is a hard core cycling faction who attend these events (often entered on both days) to 'race' each other and these are rather unpleasant on or out of the saddle.I have a picture of three of them giving me a rude sign whilst riding on the wrong side of a white line.The numbers on the bikes are too small for the naked eye to read at speed - but thank you Photoshop:)At the end of the day it is the organiser who is legally responsible if something goes wrong despite what their T's&C's say.They should stop sensationalising and stop trying to cause trouble and start being responsible and face up to the problem they've created.However,whil

st the authorities let them,they will just keep on taking the money.Cyclists don't get taken for a mug come and enjoy the beautiful New Forest whenever you want and it's FREE - unless of course your agenda is to 'race' and that's why you need to ride in an organised 'Sportive'.Most cyclists are great but the sport is littered with baddies such as Lance Armstrong.i.e. older guys who have to take anabolic steroids and drugs like EPO to keep up with the naturally athletic and fit young ones.
1000 damaged signs plus unknown amount of undamaged signs = a lot of signs per mile.

Needs more investigation, but then again cyclists always seem to be right... discuss! ;)
[quote][p][bold]Alfonso999[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ciaran[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CharlieOxbridge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: A story posted anonymously about someone who has no name.[/p][/quote]I must admit I think it is very dangerous to print articles on the basis of an anonymous comment on a news article, if that is the case here? I would assume that they did actually contact the user to confirm that this was genuine, otherwise just imagine the reports that would get published on the basis of what Southy writes!!![/p][/quote]I would like to think that someone tried to verify the tale but would they then have gone on to write "Mystery surrounds the injured man’s identity, but a reader posting under the name cyclejim "?[/p][/quote]Well seeing as they've clearly asked the police and ambulance service about it, I think it's quite clear they've tried to get to the bottom of it. You could of course just email the bloke who wrote it and ask him - his details are at the top of the story.[/p][/quote]If someone was injured then I am sorry but the cyclist needs to identify himself/herself? to validate this story.Injured cyclist if you are reading this then I hope you soon recover and I am truly sorry that you are injured.Did anyone else see the tacks apart from the organisers?..and really 1,000 signs removed-that would have to be the work of an organised chain gang!.How many signs were there in the first place??..and NO I don't condone either action if true.This sad situation is down to greed on the organisers part who just 'pack 'em in' at any cost at everyone elses expense,because they get their money up front and because there is no legal restriction on numbers or how they run the event.If you look at the organiser's FB page most entrants are pretty pe...d off that there are no refunds for the postponed Sunday and because most of them have booked their rides for the season they don't want an alternative date. 2000+ @ £28 each?,Yes please nice money if you can get it!!Many of the cyclists are really nice people who want a nice day out in a lovely area and they are VERY WELCOME,but, there is a hard core cycling faction who attend these events (often entered on both days) to 'race' each other and these are rather unpleasant on or out of the saddle.I have a picture of three of them giving me a rude sign whilst riding on the wrong side of a white line.The numbers on the bikes are too small for the naked eye to read at speed - but thank you Photoshop:)At the end of the day it is the organiser who is legally responsible if something goes wrong despite what their T's&C's say.They should stop sensationalising and stop trying to cause trouble and start being responsible and face up to the problem they've created.However,whil st the authorities let them,they will just keep on taking the money.Cyclists don't get taken for a mug come and enjoy the beautiful New Forest whenever you want and it's FREE - unless of course your agenda is to 'race' and that's why you need to ride in an organised 'Sportive'.Most cyclists are great but the sport is littered with baddies such as Lance Armstrong.i.e. older guys who have to take anabolic steroids and drugs like EPO to keep up with the naturally athletic and fit young ones.[/p][/quote]1000 damaged signs plus unknown amount of undamaged signs = a lot of signs per mile. Needs more investigation, but then again cyclists always seem to be right... discuss! ;) owen_thesaints

4:56pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Alfonso999 says...

Perhaps the baddie cyclist factions giving the single finger salute are counted as signs too?
Perhaps the baddie cyclist factions giving the single finger salute are counted as signs too? Alfonso999

5:43pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Stnana says...

Well said Alfonso, I said yesterday why pay £28 (per day) last weekend when you could do it any other day for nothing ! If anyone is really interested look on their website at the times these non racers achieved. Some had average speeds of over 20mph over distances of 58 or 86 miles. I will say again the Echos photo yesterday showed cyclists riding 3 abreast on the A35 the main Southampton to Bournemouth road.
Well said Alfonso, I said yesterday why pay £28 (per day) last weekend when you could do it any other day for nothing ! If anyone is really interested look on their website at the times these non racers achieved. Some had average speeds of over 20mph over distances of 58 or 86 miles. I will say again the Echos photo yesterday showed cyclists riding 3 abreast on the A35 the main Southampton to Bournemouth road. Stnana

6:45pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Forest Resident says...

Stnana wrote:
Well said Alfonso, I said yesterday why pay £28 (per day) last weekend when you could do it any other day for nothing ! If anyone is really interested look on their website at the times these non racers achieved. Some had average speeds of over 20mph over distances of 58 or 86 miles. I will say again the Echos photo yesterday showed cyclists riding 3 abreast on the A35 the main Southampton to Bournemouth road.
To the best of my knowledge an average speed of 20mph neither breaks any speed limits nor forms some sort of arbitrary 'level' for determining if it therefore part of a 'race' or not, so I am a little confused by the point you are trying to make with this stastic. Similarly a static photograph of cyclists three abreast also does not fully quantify any potential road traffic offence or deviance from the Highway Code, for all you know the third cyclist was overtaking the other two and the manoeuvre is therefore perfectly safe and legal. Please don't jump to assumptions just because they fit the anti cycling agenda.
[quote][p][bold]Stnana[/bold] wrote: Well said Alfonso, I said yesterday why pay £28 (per day) last weekend when you could do it any other day for nothing ! If anyone is really interested look on their website at the times these non racers achieved. Some had average speeds of over 20mph over distances of 58 or 86 miles. I will say again the Echos photo yesterday showed cyclists riding 3 abreast on the A35 the main Southampton to Bournemouth road.[/p][/quote]To the best of my knowledge an average speed of 20mph neither breaks any speed limits nor forms some sort of arbitrary 'level' for determining if it therefore part of a 'race' or not, so I am a little confused by the point you are trying to make with this stastic. Similarly a static photograph of cyclists three abreast also does not fully quantify any potential road traffic offence or deviance from the Highway Code, for all you know the third cyclist was overtaking the other two and the manoeuvre is therefore perfectly safe and legal. Please don't jump to assumptions just because they fit the anti cycling agenda. Forest Resident

6:53pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Alfonso999 says...

How about a static image and a video?
How about a static image and a video? Alfonso999

7:08pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Stnana says...

I was not suggesting any offence was committed, simply making the point that any cyclist averaging over 20 mph over a distance of 86 miles was not enjoying the scenery ! Riding 2 or 3 abreast in a bunch on the main A35,although not against the Highway Code, was extremely foolish and very inconsiderate to other road users. As these cyclists themselves have said on numerous occasions the New Forest is for everyone to enjoy, not for the personal use of any one group.
I was not suggesting any offence was committed, simply making the point that any cyclist averaging over 20 mph over a distance of 86 miles was not enjoying the scenery ! Riding 2 or 3 abreast in a bunch on the main A35,although not against the Highway Code, was extremely foolish and very inconsiderate to other road users. As these cyclists themselves have said on numerous occasions the New Forest is for everyone to enjoy, not for the personal use of any one group. Stnana

7:19pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Forest Resident says...

Considering Highway Code section 163 states drivers should give vulnerable road users (cyclists) as much room as they would when overtaking any other vehicle, I don't therefore see how cycling two abreast can be deemed foolish or inconsiderate to other drivers as the cyclists would be taking up no more road space than that of a car which would then have to be overtaken by giving the required room. I say this as both a cyclist and as a driver who has no issue waiting a few extra seconds so that I can safey overtake cyclists who are riding either single file or two abreast, I just don't see the issue here, all I see is unnecessary driver impatience and intolerance.
Considering Highway Code section 163 states drivers should give vulnerable road users (cyclists) as much room as they would when overtaking any other vehicle, I don't therefore see how cycling two abreast can be deemed foolish or inconsiderate to other drivers as the cyclists would be taking up no more road space than that of a car which would then have to be overtaken by giving the required room. I say this as both a cyclist and as a driver who has no issue waiting a few extra seconds so that I can safey overtake cyclists who are riding either single file or two abreast, I just don't see the issue here, all I see is unnecessary driver impatience and intolerance. Forest Resident

8:28pm Tue 16 Apr 13

elvisimo says...

Stnana wrote:
Well said Alfonso, I said yesterday why pay £28 (per day) last weekend when you could do it any other day for nothing ! If anyone is really interested look on their website at the times these non racers achieved. Some had average speeds of over 20mph over distances of 58 or 86 miles. I will say again the Echos photo yesterday showed cyclists riding 3 abreast on the A35 the main Southampton to Bournemouth road.
Yes and don't pay to enter the London marathon. Just pop up and run the course on the other 364 days....
[quote][p][bold]Stnana[/bold] wrote: Well said Alfonso, I said yesterday why pay £28 (per day) last weekend when you could do it any other day for nothing ! If anyone is really interested look on their website at the times these non racers achieved. Some had average speeds of over 20mph over distances of 58 or 86 miles. I will say again the Echos photo yesterday showed cyclists riding 3 abreast on the A35 the main Southampton to Bournemouth road.[/p][/quote]Yes and don't pay to enter the London marathon. Just pop up and run the course on the other 364 days.... elvisimo

10:08pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Turtlebay says...

Forest Resident wrote:
Considering Highway Code section 163 states drivers should give vulnerable road users (cyclists) as much room as they would when overtaking any other vehicle, I don't therefore see how cycling two abreast can be deemed foolish or inconsiderate to other drivers as the cyclists would be taking up no more road space than that of a car which would then have to be overtaken by giving the required room. I say this as both a cyclist and as a driver who has no issue waiting a few extra seconds so that I can safey overtake cyclists who are riding either single file or two abreast, I just don't see the issue here, all I see is unnecessary driver impatience and intolerance.
Highway Code

rule 66: Cyclists - You should: never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends.

68: You MUST NOT : ride in a dangerous, careless or inconsiderate manner.

https://www.gov.uk/r
ules-for-cyclists-59
-to-82
[quote][p][bold]Forest Resident[/bold] wrote: Considering Highway Code section 163 states drivers should give vulnerable road users (cyclists) as much room as they would when overtaking any other vehicle, I don't therefore see how cycling two abreast can be deemed foolish or inconsiderate to other drivers as the cyclists would be taking up no more road space than that of a car which would then have to be overtaken by giving the required room. I say this as both a cyclist and as a driver who has no issue waiting a few extra seconds so that I can safey overtake cyclists who are riding either single file or two abreast, I just don't see the issue here, all I see is unnecessary driver impatience and intolerance.[/p][/quote]Highway Code rule 66: Cyclists - You should: never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends. 68: You MUST NOT : ride in a dangerous, careless or inconsiderate manner. https://www.gov.uk/r ules-for-cyclists-59 -to-82 Turtlebay

10:12pm Tue 16 Apr 13

Turtlebay says...

@Forest Resident.

Perhaps as a cyclist and a car driver you think that the Highway Code does not apply to you?

Perhaps you don't own a copy?
@Forest Resident. Perhaps as a cyclist and a car driver you think that the Highway Code does not apply to you? Perhaps you don't own a copy? Turtlebay

7:10am Wed 17 Apr 13

Forest Resident says...

Turtlebay wrote:
@Forest Resident.

Perhaps as a cyclist and a car driver you think that the Highway Code does not apply to you?

Perhaps you don't own a copy?
As a road user of course it applies! What I am genuinely trying to ascertain here is that terms such as 'inconsiderate' are hugely subjective, a cyclist taking up a primary road position may be viewed as inconsiderate by the car driver behind but from the cyclists view they are doing so to avoid a dangerous piece of road surface to the near side, or may be aware from their raised viewpoint that the road narrows significantly ahead and the middle of the road in primary is therefore the safest position to adopt. There is no absolute definition to some of these sections of the Highway Code, for that reason a bit of respect, patience and tolerance from both drivers and cyclists is the only way forward.
[quote][p][bold]Turtlebay[/bold] wrote: @Forest Resident. Perhaps as a cyclist and a car driver you think that the Highway Code does not apply to you? Perhaps you don't own a copy?[/p][/quote]As a road user of course it applies! What I am genuinely trying to ascertain here is that terms such as 'inconsiderate' are hugely subjective, a cyclist taking up a primary road position may be viewed as inconsiderate by the car driver behind but from the cyclists view they are doing so to avoid a dangerous piece of road surface to the near side, or may be aware from their raised viewpoint that the road narrows significantly ahead and the middle of the road in primary is therefore the safest position to adopt. There is no absolute definition to some of these sections of the Highway Code, for that reason a bit of respect, patience and tolerance from both drivers and cyclists is the only way forward. Forest Resident

7:14am Wed 17 Apr 13

retry69 says...

Forest Resident wrote:
Turtlebay wrote:
@Forest Resident.

Perhaps as a cyclist and a car driver you think that the Highway Code does not apply to you?

Perhaps you don't own a copy?
As a road user of course it applies! What I am genuinely trying to ascertain here is that terms such as 'inconsiderate' are hugely subjective, a cyclist taking up a primary road position may be viewed as inconsiderate by the car driver behind but from the cyclists view they are doing so to avoid a dangerous piece of road surface to the near side, or may be aware from their raised viewpoint that the road narrows significantly ahead and the middle of the road in primary is therefore the safest position to adopt. There is no absolute definition to some of these sections of the Highway Code, for that reason a bit of respect, patience and tolerance from both drivers and cyclists is the only way forward.
Surely most road users do not consider the highway code has any bearing on their actions and behaviour,i would suggest most car drivers would not have held a copy since their test,which brings me nicely to my pet subject, periodic re-tests, its the way forward for increased safety and awareness on our roads
[quote][p][bold]Forest Resident[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Turtlebay[/bold] wrote: @Forest Resident. Perhaps as a cyclist and a car driver you think that the Highway Code does not apply to you? Perhaps you don't own a copy?[/p][/quote]As a road user of course it applies! What I am genuinely trying to ascertain here is that terms such as 'inconsiderate' are hugely subjective, a cyclist taking up a primary road position may be viewed as inconsiderate by the car driver behind but from the cyclists view they are doing so to avoid a dangerous piece of road surface to the near side, or may be aware from their raised viewpoint that the road narrows significantly ahead and the middle of the road in primary is therefore the safest position to adopt. There is no absolute definition to some of these sections of the Highway Code, for that reason a bit of respect, patience and tolerance from both drivers and cyclists is the only way forward.[/p][/quote]Surely most road users do not consider the highway code has any bearing on their actions and behaviour,i would suggest most car drivers would not have held a copy since their test,which brings me nicely to my pet subject, periodic re-tests, its the way forward for increased safety and awareness on our roads retry69

7:11pm Wed 17 Apr 13

ispywithmylitleeye says...

Stnana wrote:
Well said Alfonso, I said yesterday why pay £28 (per day) last weekend when you could do it any other day for nothing ! If anyone is really interested look on their website at the times these non racers achieved. Some had average speeds of over 20mph over distances of 58 or 86 miles. I will say again the Echos photo yesterday showed cyclists riding 3 abreast on the A35 the main Southampton to Bournemouth road.
20 MPH is well below the speed limit. As for 3 abreast how do you know the 3rd rider was not overtaking the two abreast riders at the time the photo was taken?
Very easy to take a photo showing 3 abreast if you just wait for an overtake.
[quote][p][bold]Stnana[/bold] wrote: Well said Alfonso, I said yesterday why pay £28 (per day) last weekend when you could do it any other day for nothing ! If anyone is really interested look on their website at the times these non racers achieved. Some had average speeds of over 20mph over distances of 58 or 86 miles. I will say again the Echos photo yesterday showed cyclists riding 3 abreast on the A35 the main Southampton to Bournemouth road.[/p][/quote]20 MPH is well below the speed limit. As for 3 abreast how do you know the 3rd rider was not overtaking the two abreast riders at the time the photo was taken? Very easy to take a photo showing 3 abreast if you just wait for an overtake. ispywithmylitleeye

5:31pm Thu 18 Apr 13

spatuluk says...

Stnana wrote:
Well said Alfonso, I said yesterday why pay £28 (per day) last weekend when you could do it any other day for nothing ! If anyone is really interested look on their website at the times these non racers achieved. Some had average speeds of over 20mph over distances of 58 or 86 miles. I will say again the Echos photo yesterday showed cyclists riding 3 abreast on the A35 the main Southampton to Bournemouth road.
To average 20mph you'd have to complete the Epic course in 4h18m, or the Standard in 2h45m.

5 out of 871 (0.6%) managed it on Epic, and 7 out of 927 (0.7%) managed it on Standard. They were something of a minority, to say the least! :P

Do you know who else were a tiny minority? People riding 3 abreast!
[quote][p][bold]Stnana[/bold] wrote: Well said Alfonso, I said yesterday why pay £28 (per day) last weekend when you could do it any other day for nothing ! If anyone is really interested look on their website at the times these non racers achieved. Some had average speeds of over 20mph over distances of 58 or 86 miles. I will say again the Echos photo yesterday showed cyclists riding 3 abreast on the A35 the main Southampton to Bournemouth road.[/p][/quote]To average 20mph you'd have to complete the Epic course in 4h18m, or the Standard in 2h45m. 5 out of 871 (0.6%) managed it on Epic, and 7 out of 927 (0.7%) managed it on Standard. They were something of a minority, to say the least! :P Do you know who else were a tiny minority? People riding 3 abreast! spatuluk

8:43pm Sat 20 Apr 13

Alfonso999 says...

Injured cyclist found yet?Police made any arrests for the 'vandalised signs?Police made any arrests for the alleged tacks ont he road?I thought I heard someone say that the police had registration numbers so should hear soon.Heard it on a video news report somewhere.Anyone given any refunds yet for the 'postponed' Sunday?Did hear that conditions at New Park were pretty grim, muddy, wet, cold and busted generator so no hot food - people couldn't get away quick enough I heard - not sure if that's true.
Injured cyclist found yet?Police made any arrests for the 'vandalised signs?Police made any arrests for the alleged tacks ont he road?I thought I heard someone say that the police had registration numbers so should hear soon.Heard it on a video news report somewhere.Anyone given any refunds yet for the 'postponed' Sunday?Did hear that conditions at New Park were pretty grim, muddy, wet, cold and busted generator so no hot food - people couldn't get away quick enough I heard - not sure if that's true. Alfonso999

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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