al78 wrote:simon-b wrote:However, I have been stuck behind cyclists in Scotland who don't pull over at passing places, and in England been in a queue of traffic stuck behind a group continuing to ride two abreast despite the tailback they were creating.
It could equally be argued the cyclists were not creating the tailback, the convoy of vehicles coming the other way was preventing overtaking and causing the tailback, and the convoy of vehicles behind were contributing to the tailback.
Cycling two abreast may have been the best decision. If they had singled out, motorists likely would have tried to squeeze past, putting the cyclists in danger. When it comes to overtaking which puts all the risk on the cyclist, the cyclist has every right to discourage it until they deem it safe for them. This is necessary until motorists are all able to judge 100% of the time when it is safe to overtake a vulnerable road user.
My safety trumps your convenience.
Absolutely safety comes first, Al. On the other hand, delaying traffic isn't only about convenience or otherwise, plenty of Scottish information about not impeding traffic explains why. England and Wales could learn from that. In the situation I mentioned, there was not a lot of traffic coming the other way and the cyclists could have safely moved into single file.
However, I do know what it's like to have a vehicle overtaking too close for comfort. I have cycled and often had vehicles overtaking alarmingly close, including on dual carriageways where there was plenty of space to pull out further. Plus safer roads and better tracks for cyclists could keep them of pavements which is becoming an increasing problem in urban areas for pedestrians. Whereas on a shared route like a bridleway, people on foot should try not to impede cyclists.