The point is the driver is dangerous. The father was aware the driver but obviously expected the driver to take more care of his child. Society needs to take more care of children rather than putting it entirely on the parents.
You can even see at the start of the clip, the kid took a position in the centre of the road rather than going up the cycle path where he'd have been obscured by the cars. Whether it was intentional or instructed, it's worth noting.
@Shen-ek2oe are you talking about the 1 metre of bike lane leading directly into the back of a parked car? How exactly would the 5 year old take that lane..phase through the cars?
I am totally in agreement with you. The child was the only one who saw the danger; in my opinion, both the car driver and the child's father were stubborn and raised the danger level unnecessarily to the child.
Absolutely - at least the kid was wearing high vis clothing as well, no idea on the dad. One of my pet hates lately is cyclists doing silly things in dark clothing and poor if any lights then blaming anyone but themselves for near incidents.
@@iainamurray Because "I'm a cyclist" mentally. He put his child in extreme danger. It's all well and good saying, but they should have stopped. They won't bring a child back to life. Cyclists need to learn a car will always win. They have rules with boats, but the overwhelming rule is you always move out the way for the bigger boat as you'll lose.
It has taken me years to get out of the minds set of, "if something happens to me, it's not my fault. And it won't happen to me, because they would be at fault"... my husband told me that you can't sue them if you're dead and that you being right isn't worth getting hurt or killed for.
My ex girlfriend used to be a triathlete and was out running on a country road. The road was narrow, a 60MPH limit and a bendy road with blind corners. A sports car came speeding around a blind corner while she was running along the road and she had to jump into ditch to avoid being killed. [as she landed in the ditch she damaged her hip and it has never been the same since ending her sporting career] She will vehemently rant on to anyone who will listen about how some utter lunatic ruined her career, but my attitude was “what the hell were you doing out running on that road. You knew full well it was a dangerous road so what did you expect?”. This didn’t go down well because her mind set was “but iv’e got the legal right to run along that road as much as I want” To which replied “Yes you have, and the car driver was indeed an #%*^hole and should not have been speeding around a blind corner, but in the end he drove off unaffected and you were the one left lying damaged in a ditch”
I can't believe the Dad wasn't saying Slow down ready to stop and then the kid asked should I Stop! This Lad has more sense than his Dad and the Driver put together!!!
I'm glad you said the child was the only person with any common sense there, that was my immediate thoughts as well. Whether you have priority or not, hanging back and leaving people to do whatever they're gonna do is key to self preservation. Just because you might have priority doesn't mean it's safe to proceed
Absolutely right.... I always say to people do you go onto a junction where you have the green light where the lorry coming at right angles is not appearing to be slowing to stop for what should be his red light? Being right but dead or seriously injured aren't somewhere I'd like to be.
I used to have the attitude of the father and I'm still assertive but I've realized that it is better to protect myself and let the bad drivers get on down the road and out of my life.
Spot on analysis. As the driver I'd had given way all day long, and probably had a shared feeling of fatherly pride in seeing a son out for a ride with his father. As the father I'd have told my child to stop. If I was in a car following behind the father and so also had to stop then I'd have had a shared sense of fatherly pride in the guided caution the father was giving his son.
If it was me, that made the mistake of "entering the corridor" - I would have stopped and allowed the young man to pass. Not attempt to "thread the needle" (simply because I wouldn't want to damage the blue car! The young cyclist knew what he was doing, and did great - one of the better cyclists I've seen recently, in all honesty)
It's truly unbelievable that when someone is on a bike the other road users no longer see it as another human. Compassion and empathy go out of the window. I see a child on a bike coming the other way I want to be careful even if there's no pinch points... How has it got so bad.
"Compassion and empathy go out of the window" we've lost those since the 90s. Most people are so selfish, self-centred and simply don't care these days. Even commentary like Ashley's this isn't going to change because the people who need to learn wont until they've killed someone. Then with pointless sentencing there's no deterrant.
@@Itsa-sh The 90s..? Lol Arguably humans never really had compassion and empathy, other than for close members of their local community, but that was lost in the 60s not the 90s.
Sadly it works both ways as equally I’ve seen far too many cyclists deliberately put them in danger in claim of the ‘I’ve got priority’ If I was driving the car I’d have slowed down to no more than a creep since it looked like 20mph roads and it looked fairly decent rain so easy chance the child falling off the bike or taking longer to break. If I was cycling I would’ve held back and waited for the car to pass as end of the day, I’d rather be safe than barge through with the ‘I’ve got priority’
How typical to push the onus onto the vulnerable party to modify their behaviour. This, in part, is precisely why drivists see themselves as kings and queens of the roads and anyone else needs to get out the way or get what's coming to them. Getting out the way, having 'rules' to force you to wait to get somewhere on foot (or be killed/injured), ceding priority, wearing stupid day glow colours, having lights like a lighthouse and plastic hats has done f.all to make vulnerable persons safer. Motons take the piss and take more all the time others are told to cede/get out the way. But now you're blaming the victims because someone with huge kinetic energy won't do what the law tells them they MUST do and even when anothers life is at stake. Yeah, you stink like an entitled motorist!
As someone from the Netherlands, where we learn to cycle from a very young age (and you'll often see young children on the road unsupervised), I completely agree with your analysis. We have to keep a close eye on young children participating in traffic (whether it's cycling, walking or any other way). Even if they know the rules well (and let's be honest, most of them only know the basics), they simply don't have the same level of control of their vehicle that we expect from adults (and they also don't have the same level of awareness). As for this video: the motorist should have taken much more care, but the father telling the child to continue on into danger is a disgrace, especially since the child was clearly uncomfortable with the situation (considering they wanted to pull over). But what made it even worse for me, was him swearing at the driver in the presence of the child. That shows a mindset we should absolutely not teach our children ("I've got priority, so I'm going to just escalate the situation and create way more danger than their needs to be").
After reading some comments on here I basically agree that the father should have acted defensively for the sake of the child (pulled over into the opening that was there). I can't help but get the feeling the kid would have pulled alongside the parked van which does have some degree of risk but I cannot say for certain. I agree that the motorists should have also given way too. One being that, from I could recall in the video, the road signs instructing what to do and the fact there was someone more vulnerable than an adult cyclist on the road (I somewhat doubt the driver even saw the kid). The kid definitely had the most common sense. As for the language used by the father? I do agree it was disgusting to swear in front of a kid. That said I have heard many a bad word when I was their age so I can't really comment on it (again I do agree you should not swear in the company of kids).
Of course, in the Netherlands, the roads have evolved to reduce risk by design, it is called "sustainable safety", and is designed to minimise risks - even when mistakes are made. As Raymond will know, this systematic improvement started in the 1970s with the "stop de kindermoord" campaign (stop child killing). I thought of that when I saw the pathetically narrow few yards of bike lane to the left of the pinch point, that the riders rightly ignored. Had they taken that lane they may have been invisible to the oncoming car, and parked cars made that lane worthless, and increases risk. That the lane does not continue beyond the pinch points is lousy design, IMO, and would not be found much in the Netherlands. Such a "provision" for cycling is as pointless as it is dangerous. I think the dad in the circumstances shown should have pre-emptively asked his kid to pull in earlier, before the kid asked. Had he said yes to the kid saying "shall I pull in" that may have been too late to be useful. But maybe another commentary is that just as it is best to use a registered driving instructor to learn to drive, so ones dad (unless he has some lessons first to unlearn bad habits) may not be the best person to supervise cycling by youngsters!
@Joe Lynch disagree. Morons in control of machines don't mix; and that applies to morons in cars as much as morons on bikes. If you can't handle your machine safely in the presence of other kinds of road vehicle, it is YOU that should be off the road.
Thank you for this - I feel this is a really good analysis. I will put my hands up as a daily cyclist and have 'cycled in to danger' before, even when common sense says to apply caution and not make a situation worse. The child here shows an important lesson to us all - ego can be really damaging (and sadly sometimes dangerous) and we must recognise when to take action, even if it goes against our own emotions/beliefs. Having more quiet streets and places where all ages and abilities feel they can safely walk/cycle/wheel is an integral part of our future - but as is empathy, recognition of mutual safety and looking out for each other. Thanks - I always enjoy your videos!
As of this comment I have only had one sour experience with a cyclist in my 10 years of driving since passing my test. All other times there was no beef at all, some even waved me on to pass or even yielded to me! Kindness costs nothing.
Absolutely spot on. It's quite sad when a 5 year old child can display more sense and risk awareness than either of the grown adults in a situation like this. If he were mine, not only would I have encouraged him to slow and move out of danger, I would have praised him for asking the important question here. Sincerely asking yourself questions like that is how you develop good road habits imo.
@@mintywebb I see you've made similar comments here. And I see you make a habit of missing the point. Was it possible that the cyclists were going to be completely safe and the car would stop? Yes. Did it happen? No. So was the smart thing to do to pull into the side, like the kid asked? Yes. I could tell by then that the car wasn't going to stop. It hadn't started to slow, as it should have. Remember Ashley's words: "Priority is give, not taken." What the father has taught is to take priority and the driver is in the wrong. It's a bad habit to teach and is a really crappy mindset. Cars need to drive safely around more vulnerable road users. What you seem to think is we should be responsible for 100% of vulnerable road users' safety. That's an awful way to think. And before you think I ask victims of sexual abuse "what they wore" as you said to someone above...No, I have never been one of those people, but you have to attack the issue at both ends. Teach how to be safe around others and teach how to keep others safe. Basically, teach cyclists where to be safe in case drivers aren't doing what they should be.
@@mintywebb well, yes, if you think the risk of being punched in the face is significant. Do you often allow yourself to be punched in the face? Is it much fun?
@@mintywebb well, yes, if you think the risk of being punched in the face is significant. Do you often allow yourself to be punched in the face? Is it much fun?
I’m not sure I fully agree. The car coming the other way was some way off when the father advised his son to continue. Perhaps some extra caution might have been warranted given the age of the child but I would have taken that gap - the child and his father reached the pinch point long before the car did. The bulk of the blame lies with the car driver, who approached the pinch point way too fast and powered through like he owned the road despite there already being a vehicle. The local police constabulary expressed a similar view to me in the twitter thread.
That's not really that surprising! Most adult bike riders are arrogant and ignorant,like a lot of car drivers. I speak as an ex driving instructor! Common sense and patience is not common! The child's father is typical! He's an idiot.
I agree with the analysis of this as a single incident. What gives more problem is what then might begin to happen as general practice. If all cyclists go by "I should be able to keep going but if the car doesn't stop I should stop" and all drivers go by "I should stop, but if I keep going the cyclist will stop for me" then we've just created a different rule than is intended, where there is a stronger incentive for drivers not to stop. How do you then stop general practice going that way and pull things back to the intention? There's surely enough creative interpretation of the HWC as it is?
When the kid asks to pull over and the father says no...as a dad that breaks my heart. Little kids voice. He even wabbles towards the oncoming car. Tough stuff to watch.
@Nothing The oncoming driver was to blame mate. Highway code is clear on it. Yes priority means nothing if you're 6 feet under but if we're attributing blame to something that happened. It's the driver at fault here. As Surrey Roads Policing unit has commented and as other traffic police have commented. Driver should have given way to the oncoming cyclists.
The adults are consumed with the politics of the situation - the cyclist seething that motorists don't give bikes priority as they should, the motorist barging through thinking he's the most important thing on the road. The kid has the most sense because he isn't contaminated by any of that, he just sees escalating danger and asks if she should take action - but is also intelligent enough to trust in his Dad's greater knowledge and experience and so follows instructions.
Why do you think the motorist should give the bike priority ? The bike has much less kinetic energy to lose , and needed to restart , than any motor vehicle . It is just like when I am out in my car and am confronted by a 38 tonne Artic coming the other way ; I will always stop for the Artic ; just as with a car and a bike , there will only ever be one winner if a car and an Artic have a coming together .
The inverse is true. The motorist only has to move their foot one inch to regain momentum, while the cyclist has to do real effort. Your arctic tanker argument is a fallacy: they actually move other stuff than the just the driver.
Great analysis, Ashley! From 5:15 of your video is the most important part in my opinion. The fact that the father was happy to let his child "carry on" was just as concerning as the opposite driver plowing through the pinch point.
@@mintywebb Having right of way doesn't mean you should take it regardless. You need to assess situations and respond, to ensure your safety and mitigate other's mistakes or bull-headedness. In this example the child assessed a potential problem, the father dismissed it and over-ruled his response to avoid danger. "I had right of way" is not a good epitaph. As for victim's of sexual assault? No, I blame those who commit the crime, and the mentality of 'boys will be boys' excusing their behaviour. Mind you, I'm biased, it's taken a lot of therapy to stop blaming myself. I was raised when "what does she expect dressed like that?" was a societal norm. Oh, and if you're wondering what I was wearing that so provoked a man, it was a school uniform, I was 12.
@@mintywebb OK, let's clarify. Yes, the driver is at fault; he should've given way, I'm not disputing that. I'm concerned the father teaching his son to overrule his sense of self preservation, putting his life at risk.
@@mintywebb The child read the danger, the dad made him carry on into that dangerous situation. He got what he wanted, a flashpoint that he could film as he has done countless times on his social media. the dad can clearly see the motorist isn't going to stop. This is where you have to be smart and the dad isn't. You cannot influence what the other driver does but you can influence the risk of injury to yourself or someone else by the decisions you take. In this instance the driver should have stopped but its clear to a five year old that the car is going to keep on going. |Because of that the father is also wrong to put his child in a dangerous situation just for his own ego. this whole 'i have the right of way' means absolutely nothing in the real world when you have two tonne of vehicle coming in the opposite direction. Easier to forget about massaging your own ego and pull over where safe. Because in events like this where you have two points of self entitlement there is only going to be one winner. And it ain't the kid on the pushbike. Smart people live to fight another day.
@@mintywebb “so you’re prepared to victim blame in one situation but not your own” are you for real? Wtf is that response, using SA as a petty point scoring comment. Sick. Proper dickhead comment that. Petty as hell.
Up until this 5:35 i was thinking that i am going to have to disagree with Ashleys way of thinking, but fair play you eventually said EXACTLY what i was thinking to myself. I would rather submit than risk my sons life, as there ain't no glory in saying it was your right of way when your child is in a coffin!
Fantastic analysis, totally agree. I'm especially pleased you wholeheartedly approved of teaching kids road safety instead of that knee jerk "they shouldn't be anywhere near a road" reaction.
I absolutely agree with you Ashley. You should also add the risk of target fixation here, As the car approaches you can see the child start to move towards the vehicle. He sees the vehicle and he moves towards it for a split second. Thankfully he regains his line and avoids the car.
Love this break down and fully agree with every single point made as a cyclist. I do have a pet peeve for those who automatically believe they have the right of way in these type of situations and continue (we are all guilty of it I guess) but it’s those who act out in aggression either by driving recklessly or genuinely abusive. As long as either party continues to keep safe and respect those on the road whether in the wrong or not then the roads will be a safer place. Conflict causes more danger in my eyes.
I agree with the analysis. My only thought playing devils advocate would be that maybe the father of the boy was worried about him stopping. Perhaps he knew the boy was fine while moving as you said but sometimes was a bit wobbly stopping and he didn't want him to fall off into the path of the oncoming car while trying to stop in a tricky spot? Sometimes it's safer to keep moving?
Absolutely nailed it right there. To stop in that situation would have been arguably more dangerous - the kid was riding a really straight line at the speed he was going
I'm absolutely 100% in agreement with you Ashley on this one. Kudos to the child for being the only one with some common sense, if it doesn't get "educated" out of him he will go far.
Iv picked up Ashley's attitude to the road well over the past year and have become a cyclist people don't mind sharing the road with. It's like penguins of Madagascar, (smile and wave. )I got T,boned at 30mph a couple of months back in a bike lane when a car ran a no entry so it won't save you all the time but giving right of way does cut the risk to everyone somewhat.
This mindset change will have a bigger impact on road safety than any infrastructure you can possibly build. A good road user can negotiate through a tricky situation simply and easily.
Thanks for not blaming the child on this one Ashley as they seemed to be the ones perceiving the danger. Just because you should have priority, it doesn't always mean it's safe to carry on regardless.
Thanks Ashley. I have commented on this on twitter and have had a change of heart over whether that child should have been on the road. I was concerned that the cycle lanes were flooded and it wasn't safe, but I taught my kids to ride on the road the same way. This is the first time I heard the child say "Shall I pull over to the side?" and I would have said "yes" because the life of my child comes before being proved right. As for the driver? Well, there was a point where he would have lost sight of that child. The very least he could have done was stopped until he was visible again. But as I said on twitter, there are some really bad "drivers" out there.
Excellent video, I totally agree. My father taught me that you "don't play games on the road" and "it's not just what you do but what other people do that can cause accidents". Whilst the driver was to blame, why on earth the father would send his son on to seemingly make a point is beyond me. Any driver prepared to do this is best avoided, it might hurt our pride but often backing down makes for a better journey.
Just to play devil's advocate, if this 5yr old had to slow down and stop, he might have become unstable and ended up placing his right foot on the ground and leaning into the oncoming traffic which showed no signs of stopping.
Exactly. In this situation, there wasn't really time to do anything different. What I would have done differently, would be to cycle alongside the child, 2 abreast, to try and manage the danger from oncoming vehicles.
@@Robert-cu9bm everyone is allowed to ride on the pavement with care, it’s effectively been decriminalised for years since the NPCC released guidelines.
@@shm5547 Rule 64 You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement. Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A sect 129 But it's still illegal, you would effectively be teaching children to break laws. The more small minor laws you break, the easier it becomes to break bigger laws. Then people wonder why young adults have no respect for the law.
This is utterly shocking ; for any parent to take such a young child cycling in such hazardous conditions is beyond irresponsible . When my children were that age , they were taken cycling in public parks , along seaside promenades , always completely away from any traffic . Ashley commented on the oncoming driver being too close to parked vehicles on his side - well so was the child on the bike : what if someone had stepped from behind one of the parked vans ; another child , or an angry dog ... that little boy would have veered right into the path of the oncoming car . The father SHOULD have instructed his son to wait until the road was completely clear before proceeding through the gap , especially as it was clear how little space there was going to be . Another failure is him encouraging the boy to ride through the traffic lane instead of using the cycle lanes to each side of the islands : these are designed to separate drivers and cyclists and to allow drivers to pass while cyclists are kept to the side . Sadly , the woke advocates who want everyone else to give them priority will keep trying to make themselves seem more important . It is a nonsense that everyone else should take responsibility for cyclists and pedestrians : the vulnerable can NEVER rely on others looking out for them - that is why so many end up dead - the only system which works is to teach cyclists to watch out for their own safety and take action to protect themselves . That poor excuse for a father is guilty of child endangerment and a pathetic example of parenthood .
Responsibility for all lies with all. There was also no cycle Lane, those are gates rendered useless and more dangerous to the child by the parked vehicles. Your last paragraph is juvenile nonsense.
I’ve been cycling to work for over a year now and it’s amazing how many close calls you have because motorists feel they have priority over a measley push bike when they should be giving way. Of course if the blockage is on their side but they have nowhere to pull in to let me through I’ll just stop and let them through like any reasonable person would
Yeah as to who goes first. I'm generally of the sense that if my lane has the parked car, I wait for oncoming to pass before moving into what is THEIR side of the road. If both sides are blocked, we take turns or act like the other person will not be stopping. (Go when you know the other person is yielding). That being said, while cycling everyone is out to kill you. Though not literally true, I tend to act as though it is. The car can be completely at fault, but if I'm dead it hardly matters.
When I learned to ride a motorcycle in the 80s, the instructor made the point of saying it's no good saying it was your right of way lying in a hospital bed. Giving way to someone is better than getting hurt
The only additional observation I would make is that perhaps a late brake action from the cyclists may have unsettled the bikes and caused the child (particularly) to fall off just as the car approached. (Wet roads). That might have been in the father's mind too. However if they'd stopped when the child first asked then the risk of this happening would have been much lower as the level of braking would have been lower.
Bikes committed first (I guess I'm incorrect) but as a general rule, I think this works. But no way would I have squeezed through and would have let them pass first no matter what. People seem unable to judge when they will come and meet The only thing I would say is that sometimes telling a child to brake quickly could destabilise them and put them in more danger
“Here lies the body of William Jay, Who died maintaining his right of way- He was right, dead right, as he sped along, But he’s just as dead as if he were wrong.”
Thank you Ronnie for this quote - never heard it all before, just "Jimmy Jay died defending his rigjt of way" which my Mum used to say to us all when teaching us road sense (walking !!) thanks again 💯✔👍💖
I fully agree with the analysis, and I will specifically say again, in my state, the verbiage of the highway code is that a motorist must allow a cyclist enough room that the cyclist can fall down without being hit by the car. I like the verbiage because it is quite clear.
One could say the child hasn't been 'corrupted' by being an adult road user and the attitudes that brings. The kid still has the natural tendency of self-preservation that screamed danger when faced with this situation. The father, who has probably been in many dangerous situations on the road, has become more numb to this instinct unless a collision is imminent. He is effectively teaching his son to ignore that internal scream of danger as he does himself. It does sometimes seem like something we're meant to do. I had a similar situation the other day where I could stay on my side of the road to pass a parked car at the bottom of a hill. I had just cycled down a hill and I was doing 30-40 km/h (20-25 mph), but I was about to cycle up the hill ahead. I saw the parked car on my side of the road, I saw the oncoming car, and I had the scream of danger going off in my head. For some reason I decided keeping my momentum was more important as I didn't want to start up on the hill. I was able to stay on my side, the oncoming driver had their entire lane, my speed was slowed by the hill, but there wasn't enough room for it to be safe. I've been thinking about it since, especially the oncoming driver's smile -- I wonder what about the situation amused her -- either blissfully unaware or gleefully keeping going to teach me a lesson?
I have to say I agree 100% with everything you say here. When I'm in a situation like this, who I think has priority very much takes 2nd place to avoiding the risk altogether. As either the driver or the cyclist here I would have yielded.
@@ashley_neal im a hgv driver of 20 years, no serious crash, 2 minor bumps, i have learned, its not what i should do and its not whats law, its what the other idiot does. seeing what iv seen, i would not take 5 year old on road
I understand your comments about the father, saying carry on when maybe he could have called a stop, but if he told the child to stop, would that have led to a wobble and maybe fall into the path of the oncoming car ?
My worst experience cycling through one of those pinch-points was when a car tried to pass me, but it wasn't until I heard him that I knew he wasn't going to stop. Wouldn't have been quite so scary if I didn't have bags of groceries from the supermarket on both sides of the carrier (because my car was out of action)!
When I used to cycle in town, I'd get out into the middle of the lane going through a pinch-point (after doing a rear ob), then pull over to the left as soon as I was clear so following cars could pass safely and quickly. With the cyclists on the country lane, providing the oncoming car is on his side of the road there is no need for him to slow down...the cyclists don't have to ride so irresponsibly close together...if one wobbled or had a tyre pop he could bring all his mates down. The can see the oncoming car and should give it space.
I am sure the father now realises he gave his son the wrong answer. Hopefully this will be a learning curve for him. I personally never took my son out cycling on a road. No matter how well you instruct - the unpredictable can always happen. We always went to parks to cycle and he does not own a cycle now he is grown. I have a bicycle which I take to coastal paths etc and I generally do not cycle on roads as I consider it is too dangerous.
Exactly. The dad only had a small amount of time make a decision. He may have made the wrong decision, but not necessarily out of stubbornness or entitlement
Maybe you're right, but the kid was alert to the situation and would have had plenty of time to stop safely and not wobble. Especially considering how well he rode in a straight line whilst turning his head
Having watched the clip a couple of times, for me there are three thoughts: 1 - That street is crying out for a segregated cycleway, preferably as part of a combined thru-routes and 'safe routes to schools' network. Such would at a stroke remove the conflict which caused the questions raised. 2 - The cycling bypass, which is infrastructure built until I think the 1980s, is even more out of date than that, and illustrates how little attention we pay to maintenance / updating. A practice that needs to be fixed. 3 - This and Ashley's recent unfit-to-drive video illustrate the need for continuing driver education / monitoring. Two weeks ago a 74 year old pensioner Arthur Robert McGrillen was given a 2.5 year prison sentence for killing one person on a bike with his car, and seriously injuring another. He had failed to self-disclose a stroke when renewing his driving license. Two months ago an 82 year old pensioner Peter Gardner was given 6 months in prison for killing a 70 year old on a bike when he could only read a number plate at 10ft. I suggest that the current system does not work, and would not actually be that expensive to fix - very little work for a GP nurse to do a rapid go/no go check, an refer to the GP if necessary. On the clip I'd suggest that this driver will continue causing risks to other people unless educated somehow. I'd suggest a re-evaluation every 10 years when photocard is renewed, or far more widespread camera enforcement and courses. There was a startingly similar case, with a similar vid, when a 28 year old mountain guide called Jake David Tomkinson received a jail sentence when he fell asleep at the after he decided to drive home after an all night trek on Snowdon, rather than check into a hotel for a sleep.
I agree completely with everything you said. I live in a city with an excellent cycle network, and I'll take a longer route on the cycle path if it means staying off the roads. There's an unattractive bolshy streak that's very apparent today, with so many people thinking that they're the exception to every rule and they can do what they want. As you pointed out, the only person not displaying that attitude was the 5 year old, and they were the student in the situation. The child only asked if they should pull in because they had assessed the danger and felt unsafe. I would advise that if they had to ask the question, the answer is yes, you should pull in to the side. It's very easy to get into that argument of "who has right of way", and there are a lot of drivers out there who have taken umbrage to the change in law that gives the more vulnerable party right of way. Don't they know that driver owns the road and is the only person who should be on it? I've met plenty of drivers like that out and about. It's a big part of the reason why I stopped driving and stick to cycling.
There has NOT been a change in law ; only an ill conceived change in advice . In this situation both parties have right of way , and also equal priority .
@@derekheeps1244 As the video points out, right of way is given, not taken and that nobody has "right of way". The law favours the most vulnerable party in the situation, which is inarguably the 5 year old child and not your ego. You do not own the road, and you have the responsibility to conduct yourself with all due care and attention while you are driving on it. Since when did it become ok to forget your manners as soon as you sit down behind a steering wheel?
Imagine if the driver of the oncoming car was the same one as in Ashleys ' Unfit to Drive' video. Having priority and proving a point for social media clicks doesn't stop you or your child getting killed. There are lot of older drivers with very poor eyesight and no awareness of anything around them.
"I'm very sorry dear, I'm afraid our little Billy died in a traffic accident when I took him out cycling. He was hit by an oncoming car after I told him to keep going when Billy asked if he should stop. We had priority though!"
"I'm very sorry dear, I'm afraid I was held up on my way home because I killed a child on a bike. You see although he had priority, and was vulnerable, I decided I'm more important and so I wanted to go, and my car is bigger than a child on a bike anyway."
@@jackw7714 "the funny part tho is that the child didnt actually have priority nor enough brains to stop after seeing a car, probably because he was a 5 year old and shouldnt have been on the road in the first place, especially during that weather. only the fittest survive"
Starting with your analysis; I agree wholeheartedly. Addressing some of the other comments I've seen elsewhere: 1) The child shouldn't be on the road. I still remember coming home from playing when I was about 5 to find a police car on the drive. A neighbour had complained that I was cycling on the path. The policeman explained that he'd come round so that the neighbour would see they'd responded, but he wanted to explain to me that he'd much rather I was cycling on the path than on the road as he wanted me to be safe. My point here is that it's actually illegal for the cyclist to cycle on the footpath - even if they're five. I suspect the same people complaining that the 5 year old should be on the road would also be quick to complain about cyclists on a footpath. 2) It's a main road and it's meant for cars not five year old cyclists. It's clearly a residential area with traffic calming and houses adjacent to the road. It's not a main road.
Priority is given not taken but should ALWAYS be given to more vulnerable road users under law. The analogy of Running around a swimming pool is horribly wrong, this is more like walking around a swimming pool while an adult runs around it in the other direction, running is wrong whoever does it and the child did nothing wrong!
This is just one of the reasons that I will cycle alongside my kids in preference to behind them until they're more experienced If dad had been alongside then the driver simply would not have been able to to bully through. Also protects from idiot close passes / left hooks coming from behind Too many times where my assumption that drivers would give some consideration to a child was shown to be horribly misplaced, so now I actively remove every opportunity i can for people to drive badly in a way that risks my kids lives. Still happens, sadly - but much less.
@@shm5547 There's no such thing as 'right of way' in these cases. The principle is 'priority'. And if you've watched Ashley's videos, you'll know how priority should be managed.
@@tarnmonath but when you're teaching kids cycling, they are always asking should I stop, who has priority etc. The first, most basic thing, is to teach them the rules. Only then do you move onto managing risk from rule breakers. The only thing the father could do better here, is to ride 2 abreast with his kid to do that defensive cycling for them. A point Ashley completely missed.
I watched this on the Blackbeltbarrister and made a similar comment regarding priorities. I said that I cringe , when I here somebody say : "I've got the right of way ". Some approaching drivers either don't know, or simply don't care , or are under the influence, and drive on regardless expecting me to give way ( which I do ). I'm please that your strike has been removed.
The lad has shown he is very bright and capable of listening to, and following, instructions. You have to learn to ride on the road at some stage, the earlier the better. Cyclists put themselves at risk every time they use our roads as we share them with larger, faster and heavier vehicles. I don't think the parent has done anything wrong personally.
As a teacher, I am impressed with the question of the child. Further I agree with your assessment Ashley. A little point on the side and offtopic. 6 months ago you and I where talking about a Cruyff-shirt you where wearing. As a Dutchman I was proud to see that. Little did I know, sorry about that, what I found out a few days ago, that you where a professional footballplayer. Now I really understand the shirt! Keep on going with these video's. They are educational for everyone. In and outside of the UK.
Coming from a country with 23,4 million bicycles and a population of 17,5 Million people I see this: The father missed the opportunity to have the child ride between the curb and himself. This is very common in the Netherlands as it creates a safe(r) space for the child on the road. It would als have given an extremely clear signal to the oncoming car they are expected to wait. In the event the oncoming car still barges trough, the father can always steer to the left and push/knock the child over in the direction of the curb into safety.
@@MrSabretooth19 Have you looked outside some train stations in the Netherlands? I'm English but I remember seeing over a thousand bikes outside of a station in Utrecht, and it would've been impossible to get to "your" bike, as they were 50 deep and all leaning against each other up to a wall So I do believe that you can have more bikes than people in a country
@@MrSabretooth19 Not really. It is fairly common to have a normal (daily) bike and a recreational bike like a mountain bike, race bike or even a cargo bike. It is just the dutch equivalent to an American having daily driver, pickup truck and quad.
Absolutely agree with you on this one, Ashley. The little cyclist did a great job in this clip! Most car drivers don't seem to like giving way to cyclists apparently, even if they're little kids.
my tuppence worth is the cyclist reached the parked cars (not the pinch point) long before the car, therefore they were already commited to the passing manoeuvre, irrespective of whether its a cyclist, hgv, bus, pedestrian or car the oncoming driver should have given way and who the hell tries to squeeze past a young child on a bike
Absolutely spot in as usual. There is definitely advice missing regarding oncoming cyclists, the current advice only covers overtaking. This is especially common on narrow one lane country roads, as I cyclist I try to take secondary when faced with a motor vehicle that cannot possibly pass me safely, but some drivers don't slow down and think they have priority, when of course neither road user actually does. Relying on common sense is insufficient (as too many road users lack it).
Can’t argue with a lot said here! The lad’s body language clearly displayed a lack of self confidence approaching the hazard as his pedalling stroke momentarily ‘stuttered’. His verbalisation reiterated this uncertainty. Now, my own Father always taught me to treat all other road users as being blind, or at best, idiots! “Presume they have not, and will not see you” were his last words…just before the number 189 bus ran him over!! But seriously, that advice is sound advice and 30yrs riding motorcycles and still being in one piece is partly down to Dad’s words. I was slightly concerned that the Father of the child did not verbalise anything about the car reversing into the road at the end of the clip. This Father seems to me to be very reactive, when cycling with a child being taught Road sense, surely proactivity is the more desirable approach!
Being Devil’s Advocate, the driver might have been a little surprised seeing a 5 year old in front of him and might not quite been able to judge his speed, and got himself into a bit of a quandary and ended up ****ing things up. What I find quite worrying about this is would that child be easily spotted by someone opening a van or car door? Has anyone got any experience of that?
Hey Ash. This video has almost bought me to tears. I completely agree with your comments. Hats off to the lad, listen to your kids guys. This one will go far!
Should the motorist not have stopped and waited before the traffic calming chicane, as the sign is set up as "give way for oncoming vehicles" in the direction the motorist was coming from?
Ashley, I totally agree with you. Personally, I'm always terrified for young kids when they are on the road on their scooters or bikes. It only takes one entitled crazy driver to turn a family's life upside down. I would rather kids used the pavement; sensibly, of course. I know that pavements users get very possessive of the pavement, but I think if we all tried we could share the pavement peacefully. We just need to care enough for each other.
The problem is that car driver are also very possessive of the streets and roads. "Bicycles don't belong here!" Car drivers must learn that streets and roads are not made for them to get as fast as possible from A to B. They must adjust to road users like bicyclists when they are in residential streets like this. And I knew that most comments in here would be on what the bicyclists were doing wrong instead of what the car driver was doing wrong, even when the car dirver is posessing a murder weapon, his car.
If cyclists just used the pavement too many drivers would see this as a green light to continue driving poorly. We need to educate drivers which is difficult because most drivers don't believe they can be better. Many cyclists feel that way too.
Had that been me, I would always be cycling /further out/ into the road (yet still behind) than my boys on their bikes. This provides the opportunity for greater visibility and safety and also means the cyclists occupy a greater portion of the field of view for the oncoming driver. Also, had the father done this and chosen to instructed the boy to carry on in the way that he did, he would have ensured that he himself was at greater risk from oncoming vehicles or vehicles behind trying overtake, than the little boy, and that's really how it ought to be. Having said that, there remains the argument that if cyclists don't on occasions attempt to take priority when it certainly should be theirs, cyclists would forever be stopping for arrogant drivers. I'm afraid drivers (and I'm a driver - I barely cycle these days) do need to be taken to task on this. I think the Highway Code should be much more forthright on obliging large vehicles to yield to more vulnerable road users. So many drivers just don't give a flying fig about "giving priority".
Top notch - as always. Ego and stubbornness could easily have resulted in a fatality here. I agree - full credit to the Child who displayed more sense than the "so called" Adults. Stay safe out there.
As a cyclist myself, you are totally correct to say priority is given. After all, your life is on the line and if there's any doubt, you must slow down and stop if necessary.
Whilst I agree with you, I think there's a tendency for cyclists to do this because as vulnerable road users they don't want to be bullied by motorists which is understandable given how dangerous the roads can be if they allow that to happen.
I agree with your take. I think an alternative dad could have taken would be to position further right. People see a gap that is physically big enough for their vehicle and go for it. He recognised well that the motorist should have held back and the meeting point couldn't be shared, if he was assertive by taking up the centre of the gap and so "asking for priority" I think the motorist would have done the correct thing
100% with you on this one, Ashley. I did wonder if we were going to see something horrific when I saw the car continue toward the cyclists, glad it didn't turn out that way. That young man is quite a smart kid and has obviously had some experience of cycling already.
I disagree with the assessment of the dad. Suddenly telling his kid to stop may cause him to swerve or even fall. Startling such a young biker can be dangerous in a situation like this. Otherwise spot on analysis!
I’m in total agreement that public roads are for everyone, including supervised five year olds on bicycles. But the father should understand self preservation comes first. A bit like crossing a one-way street; always look both ways
"Plainly and simply the driver should have given way but instead they barge through a narrowing and endangered the life of a five-year-old," I think Neal's opinion & the sentiment in the UA-cam piece, this time, is a very good, heartfelt, and an honest summary of how car drivers should behave/don't behave towards others. Also, he talks with conviction, together with frank concern, on how ‘us’ cyclists should react when drivers do not think of safety beyond their own. His point is that cyclists do not have the safe capability to "barge" - however much I/we want/do this.
As soon as the parent said - ‘carry on to his child’ despite it being clear the car wasn’t going to stop - The parent, typical. Yes, we can all hope drivers were amazing and didn’t make mistakes. I don’t understand this, why put yourself into a dangerous situation just because you know you are right.
About letting your child ride in front of you: There was a case where a child on a bike riding in front of her went forward at a junction and was killed and her mother could do nothing. I think this was 2010 or a year earlier. I always understood after that that a child should ride behind the adult?
Absolute nonsense. If there was a clear opportunity for the child to pull over when it became clear the car wasn’t going to stop you might have a point- but by the time it was obvious the car was carrying on the child was next to the white van and there was no opportunity to pull over so carrying on was the safest option. If the child had pulled over there he would more than likely have overbalanced and would be more likely to fall into the oncoming car than if he had carried on riding. And to label the father as blasé about his child’s safety on the basis of this clip is staggering. I’m not one of the “I’ve got priority” brigade as you put it, but I think the father did exactly the right thing here in a very short window to make a decision - the least chance of a collision was for the child to hold their riding line. To pull over so near parked vehicles would likely have panicked him more. To put any blame at all on the father here is what I’d call victim blaming
As a motorist passing kids (or animals), no matter if they're on the sidewalk or road, moving or stopped. you need to expect the unexpected. The kid can actually stop and lose balance and fall over, or as the speed drops their path can actually get more erratic as it's harder to stay upright. One of the big issues I'm seeing on british roads (through video's online) is that there's no respect for other road users. It's mostly "Me, me and me" and nobody or nothing is allowed to slow me down for a second. Other people are treated as objects, not humans. Generally motorists tend to pass people on foot or bicycle like they are street furniture, which really gets shown off when people pass a cyclist, and 2 seconds later take a left turn. There's no way you didn't see the cyclist, it just doesn't seem to register in their brain that they are also moving objects and they're cutting someone off by doing that. And it's not just something that's happening in the GB, but GB just stands out as one of the extremes at the moment. There needs to be an attitude change in society.
@@zbf5h89ftb Oh that's true, but it doesn't negate the video's online where a lot of people still seem to be absolutely oblivious of other road users. It's a problem that's getting worse at an alarming rate, and steps need to be taken to counter it.
Agree mostly with you AN - apart from fact that many of my friends say father is still irresponsible for taking child on residential road, in wet conditions, getting child at young age to ride on these street in mixed and rainy slippery conditions and putting child very much in danger.
One can only assume that this father hates his child and has decided to put his life at great risk....has he even seen the standard of the average driver on our roads?
I'd be hesitant to come to a complete stop in that situation as the father, as that isn't entirely safe either. By stopping at a pinch point, you're less visible against the parked cars; and so traffic may be less likely to see you and therefore giveway, creating a more dangerous situation. I too would probably have pulled in to avoid the dangerous car but by doing so you've got less options to avoid a collision if the car continues to encroach, at least if you get hit you've somewhere to fall and are not simply crushed between the parked cars and the oncoming car.
Cyclist since the age of about 5 ( pure coincidence it's the age of the child in this clip) and a driver for a little over 35 years, including almost 20 as a commercial driver. Also trained to be a Cat B driving instructor - didn't quite make it, down to terrible nerves, but I won't go into all that! As always, great analysis by Ashley and I have nothing but praise for your opinions and advice. I try to follow what you say and advise when driving ; the truth is that we all make mistakes and poor judgment calls on the road. I don't believe there's such a thing as a perfect driver, but we can strive to be safe and competent. After all, if F1 drivers can make mistakes from time to time, what chance do we regular drivers have! I have an idea - it's quite radical I know, but how about the government introducing a short cycling segment into the driving test? I don't mean miles and miles, but maybe 10 - 15 minutes on a few roads near the test center. You would be followed by an examiner possibly on an electric bike ( similar to motorcycle instructors) giving directions on residential and or more busy roads before continuing the test in the car. I say this as it would allow candidates to 'feel' what it's like to be the vulnerable road user ; perhaps this would help reduce the contempt SOME motorists have for cyclists? It probably will never happen of course, but I'd love to hear what Ashley and other viewers think? As Ashley usually says.. " Stay safe" and have a good day everyone 😉
F1 is a little different because if you don't occasionally push too hard, they are not trying hard enough. But I agree that we all make mistakes, but how many of us either fail to notice awkward situations or ask ourselves "how could I have done better?".
Some years ago, I did a driving assessment of an employee. On our side of the road was a parked car, there wasn't enough room for two cars to pass each other alongside the parked car. Approaching us were two cars, separated by a distance. The driver being assessed, correctly waited for the first car to come through, then pulled out into the face of the second oncoming car, forcing it to brake. I asked why they had done that, their reply was "I waited my turn". Of course, I had to explain, there was no such thing as having a turn, and duly failed the assessment, on the grounds of unsafe manoeuvre.
IMO this demonstrates that this father is trying to teach (his far more sensible child) to use the "I'm entitled, my road too, never back down..." mentality that some have (not just cyclist btw). I think Ashley got this one 100%. But I would like to add an observation on the latter part of the video that he did not cover. If it were my child (or myself for that matter) I would be seriously planning to slow down or stop as they approach the reversing silver car. We just don't know and must not assume what that reversing car is going to do. As a motorcyclist I always assume a driver has NOT seen me and WILL do something stupid, careless or even aggressive. Like for instance reversing down the road into a parking space or driveway ..... Rushing headlong into a hazard even if it's your right of way is how risk escalates into harm.
@@richardsimpson3792 Indeed, though I don't know which of those roads at that junction is would be classified as major or minor. In any case I don't think "..But you were on a minor road..' is a valid defence for a person accused of reversing over another.
@@JayMoog Well, reversing into someone is clearly going to be an offence...but I thought the act of reversing onto a major from a minor was an offence in itself...although reversing out of a driveway is not.
I mean the kid made the most sensible judgement call out of all of them when he said should I pull over. Daddy cyclist was a knob for forcing his child to carry in when he was clearly uncomfortable with the situation.
Glad you've done this Ash, I had the exact same opinion as you but saying it on twitter would just get people saying I'm an angry motorist. The kid has every right to be there and is fine, but I wouldn't want my kid barrelling into a pinch point even with "priority". I wouldn't put my car in that position, if there was space, never mind my child.
Yeah you’re right, kid spotted the danger and naturally wanted to avoid it, his thought process was about keeping himself safe and not who’s in the right. Unfortunately a lot of cyclists (and drivers, but less likely to be injured) seem to put themselves in danger just because they believe they have the right of way. I posted on the clip originally I don’t understand why anyone on a bike would put themselves or others in harms way, a person v car situation the person is always coming off worse and no amount of finger pointing afterwards will help bring someone back from the possible worst outcome.
I very much agree with what you've said, when i saw the video a few days back i was shocked that when the little kid asked if he should stop and pull over the father said no carry on, clearly the child saw the potential danger (or was scared of the situation) while the father just wanted to go through regardless of it it put his child at risk because he was in the 'right' and the driver was in the 'wrong'.
The child had more road awareness and did a quicker risk assessment than his father.
Put him in for driving lessons, he'd probably do better than his Dad 😆
The point is the driver is dangerous. The father was aware the driver but obviously expected the driver to take more care of his child. Society needs to take more care of children rather than putting it entirely on the parents.
I'm impressed with how the child analysed so far ahead, and asked the question. Full marks to him.
You can even see at the start of the clip, the kid took a position in the centre of the road rather than going up the cycle path where he'd have been obscured by the cars. Whether it was intentional or instructed, it's worth noting.
@Shen-ek2oe are you talking about the 1 metre of bike lane leading directly into the back of a parked car? How exactly would the 5 year old take that lane..phase through the cars?
I am totally in agreement with you. The child was the only one who saw the danger; in my opinion, both the car driver and the child's father were stubborn and raised the danger level unnecessarily to the child.
Absolutely - at least the kid was wearing high vis clothing as well, no idea on the dad. One of my pet hates lately is cyclists doing silly things in dark clothing and poor if any lights then blaming anyone but themselves for near incidents.
But the dad then wouldn't have had a video to post.
Why was the Dad being stubborn?
@@iainamurray
Because "I'm a cyclist" mentally.
He put his child in extreme danger.
It's all well and good saying, but they should have stopped. They won't bring a child back to life.
Cyclists need to learn a car will always win. They have rules with boats, but the overwhelming rule is you always move out the way for the bigger boat as you'll lose.
The father capped it off nicely by swearing in front of a 5 year old child.
It has taken me years to get out of the minds set of, "if something happens to me, it's not my fault. And it won't happen to me, because they would be at fault"... my husband told me that you can't sue them if you're dead and that you being right isn't worth getting hurt or killed for.
Exactly
They can have "he was right" written on the gravestone.
My ex girlfriend used to be a triathlete and was out running on a country road. The road was narrow, a 60MPH limit and a bendy road with blind corners.
A sports car came speeding around a blind corner while she was running along the road and she had to jump into ditch to avoid being killed.
[as she landed in the ditch she damaged her hip and it has never been the same since ending her sporting career]
She will vehemently rant on to anyone who will listen about how some utter lunatic ruined her career, but my attitude was “what the hell were you doing out running on that road. You knew full well it was a dangerous road so what did you expect?”.
This didn’t go down well because her mind set was “but iv’e got the legal right to run along that road as much as I want”
To which replied “Yes you have, and the car driver was indeed an #%*^hole and should not have been speeding around a blind corner, but in the end he drove off unaffected and you were the one left lying damaged in a ditch”
I get why she is now your ex-girlfriend 😂
Your husband sounds like a good man
I agree that the kid had more sense. He obviously didn't feel safe with the oncoming car.
Yes
I can't believe the Dad wasn't saying Slow down ready to stop and then the kid asked should I Stop!
This Lad has more sense than his Dad and the Driver put together!!!
His instincts were correct.
His dad had to get he footage for youtube some how. Why is the 5 year old on the road in the first place.
Sorry but the dad's an irresponsible ego fuelled pillock.
I'm glad you said the child was the only person with any common sense there, that was my immediate thoughts as well. Whether you have priority or not, hanging back and leaving people to do whatever they're gonna do is key to self preservation. Just because you might have priority doesn't mean it's safe to proceed
Absolutely right.... I always say to people do you go onto a junction where you have the green light where the lorry coming at right angles is not appearing to be slowing to stop for what should be his red light? Being right but dead or seriously injured aren't somewhere I'd like to be.
Look idiots you are not allowed to kill cause you have a driver's license
I used to have the attitude of the father and I'm still assertive but I've realized that it is better to protect myself and let the bad drivers get on down the road and out of my life.
Spot on analysis. As the driver I'd had given way all day long, and probably had a shared feeling of fatherly pride in seeing a son out for a ride with his father.
As the father I'd have told my child to stop. If I was in a car following behind the father and so also had to stop then I'd have had a shared sense of fatherly pride in the guided caution the father was giving his son.
If it was me, that made the mistake of "entering the corridor" - I would have stopped and allowed the young man to pass. Not attempt to "thread the needle" (simply because I wouldn't want to damage the blue car! The young cyclist knew what he was doing, and did great - one of the better cyclists I've seen recently, in all honesty)
It's truly unbelievable that when someone is on a bike the other road users no longer see it as another human. Compassion and empathy go out of the window. I see a child on a bike coming the other way I want to be careful even if there's no pinch points... How has it got so bad.
"Compassion and empathy go out of the window" we've lost those since the 90s. Most people are so selfish, self-centred and simply don't care these days. Even commentary like Ashley's this isn't going to change because the people who need to learn wont until they've killed someone. Then with pointless sentencing there's no deterrant.
@@Itsa-sh The 90s..? Lol
Arguably humans never really had compassion and empathy, other than for close members of their local community, but that was lost in the 60s not the 90s.
Sadly it works both ways as equally I’ve seen far too many cyclists deliberately put them in danger in claim of the ‘I’ve got priority’
If I was driving the car I’d have slowed down to no more than a creep since it looked like 20mph roads and it looked fairly decent rain so easy chance the child falling off the bike or taking longer to break.
If I was cycling I would’ve held back and waited for the car to pass as end of the day, I’d rather be safe than barge through with the ‘I’ve got priority’
Well said sir
How typical to push the onus onto the vulnerable party to modify their behaviour. This, in part, is precisely why drivists see themselves as kings and queens of the roads and anyone else needs to get out the way or get what's coming to them.
Getting out the way, having 'rules' to force you to wait to get somewhere on foot (or be killed/injured), ceding priority, wearing stupid day glow colours, having lights like a lighthouse and plastic hats has done f.all to make vulnerable persons safer.
Motons take the piss and take more all the time others are told to cede/get out the way.
But now you're blaming the victims because someone with huge kinetic energy won't do what the law tells them they MUST do and even when anothers life is at stake.
Yeah, you stink like an entitled motorist!
As someone from the Netherlands, where we learn to cycle from a very young age (and you'll often see young children on the road unsupervised), I completely agree with your analysis. We have to keep a close eye on young children participating in traffic (whether it's cycling, walking or any other way). Even if they know the rules well (and let's be honest, most of them only know the basics), they simply don't have the same level of control of their vehicle that we expect from adults (and they also don't have the same level of awareness).
As for this video: the motorist should have taken much more care, but the father telling the child to continue on into danger is a disgrace, especially since the child was clearly uncomfortable with the situation (considering they wanted to pull over). But what made it even worse for me, was him swearing at the driver in the presence of the child. That shows a mindset we should absolutely not teach our children ("I've got priority, so I'm going to just escalate the situation and create way more danger than their needs to be").
After reading some comments on here I basically agree that the father should have acted defensively for the sake of the child (pulled over into the opening that was there). I can't help but get the feeling the kid would have pulled alongside the parked van which does have some degree of risk but I cannot say for certain. I agree that the motorists should have also given way too. One being that, from I could recall in the video, the road signs instructing what to do and the fact there was someone more vulnerable than an adult cyclist on the road (I somewhat doubt the driver even saw the kid).
The kid definitely had the most common sense.
As for the language used by the father? I do agree it was disgusting to swear in front of a kid. That said I have heard many a bad word when I was their age so I can't really comment on it (again I do agree you should not swear in the company of kids).
Of course, in the Netherlands, the roads have evolved to reduce risk by design, it is called "sustainable safety", and is designed to minimise risks - even when mistakes are made. As Raymond will know, this systematic improvement started in the 1970s with the "stop de kindermoord" campaign (stop child killing). I thought of that when I saw the pathetically narrow few yards of bike lane to the left of the pinch point, that the riders rightly ignored. Had they taken that lane they may have been invisible to the oncoming car, and parked cars made that lane worthless, and increases risk. That the lane does not continue beyond the pinch points is lousy design, IMO, and would not be found much in the Netherlands. Such a "provision" for cycling is as pointless as it is dangerous. I think the dad in the circumstances shown should have pre-emptively asked his kid to pull in earlier, before the kid asked. Had he said yes to the kid saying "shall I pull in" that may have been too late to be useful.
But maybe another commentary is that just as it is best to use a registered driving instructor to learn to drive, so ones dad (unless he has some lessons first to unlearn bad habits) may not be the best person to supervise cycling by youngsters!
@Joe Lynch disagree. Morons in control of machines don't mix; and that applies to morons in cars as much as morons on bikes. If you can't handle your machine safely in the presence of other kinds of road vehicle, it is YOU that should be off the road.
Your comment is spot on!
In my opinion, he was far too ready to hurl the abuse at the motorist adding evidence that he was far too aware of what might happen.
Thank you for this - I feel this is a really good analysis. I will put my hands up as a daily cyclist and have 'cycled in to danger' before, even when common sense says to apply caution and not make a situation worse. The child here shows an important lesson to us all - ego can be really damaging (and sadly sometimes dangerous) and we must recognise when to take action, even if it goes against our own emotions/beliefs. Having more quiet streets and places where all ages and abilities feel they can safely walk/cycle/wheel is an integral part of our future - but as is empathy, recognition of mutual safety and looking out for each other.
Thanks - I always enjoy your videos!
I enjoyed reading your comment.
ALL cyclists please remember that next time you want to jump a red light
Good comment. (Also to others, please let's not make it about red lights and all the usual arguments...)
@@dpace2310 That applies to you as well when you run a red/amber
light.
As of this comment I have only had one sour experience with a cyclist in my 10 years of driving since passing my test. All other times there was no beef at all, some even waved me on to pass or even yielded to me! Kindness costs nothing.
Absolutely spot on. It's quite sad when a 5 year old child can display more sense and risk awareness than either of the grown adults in a situation like this.
If he were mine, not only would I have encouraged him to slow and move out of danger, I would have praised him for asking the important question here. Sincerely asking yourself questions like that is how you develop good road habits imo.
@@mintywebb don't be daft! They wouldn't leave the house, far too dangerous!
@@mintywebb I see you've made similar comments here. And I see you make a habit of missing the point. Was it possible that the cyclists were going to be completely safe and the car would stop? Yes. Did it happen? No. So was the smart thing to do to pull into the side, like the kid asked? Yes. I could tell by then that the car wasn't going to stop. It hadn't started to slow, as it should have.
Remember Ashley's words: "Priority is give, not taken." What the father has taught is to take priority and the driver is in the wrong. It's a bad habit to teach and is a really crappy mindset. Cars need to drive safely around more vulnerable road users. What you seem to think is we should be responsible for 100% of vulnerable road users' safety. That's an awful way to think.
And before you think I ask victims of sexual abuse "what they wore" as you said to someone above...No, I have never been one of those people, but you have to attack the issue at both ends. Teach how to be safe around others and teach how to keep others safe. Basically, teach cyclists where to be safe in case drivers aren't doing what they should be.
Excellent point about developing good road habits. Well said.
@@mintywebb well, yes, if you think the risk of being punched in the face is significant. Do you often allow yourself to be punched in the face? Is it much fun?
@@mintywebb well, yes, if you think the risk of being punched in the face is significant. Do you often allow yourself to be punched in the face? Is it much fun?
I’m not sure I fully agree. The car coming the other way was some way off when the father advised his son to continue. Perhaps some extra caution might have been warranted given the age of the child but I would have taken that gap - the child and his father reached the pinch point long before the car did. The bulk of the blame lies with the car driver, who approached the pinch point way too fast and powered through like he owned the road despite there already being a vehicle. The local police constabulary expressed a similar view to me in the twitter thread.
That kid was riding more sensibly than a lot of grownups!
Probably why the driver seemed to have confidence in the kids cycling
That's not really that surprising!
Most adult bike riders are arrogant and ignorant,like a lot of car drivers.
I speak as an ex driving instructor!
Common sense and patience is not common!
The child's father is typical!
He's an idiot.
@@nearlyretired7005 retire urgently.
I agree
Honestly says a lot about the state of our roads. 5 year old kid is a better road user than 90% of adults.
I agree with the analysis of this as a single incident. What gives more problem is what then might begin to happen as general practice.
If all cyclists go by "I should be able to keep going but if the car doesn't stop I should stop" and all drivers go by "I should stop, but if I keep going the cyclist will stop for me" then we've just created a different rule than is intended, where there is a stronger incentive for drivers not to stop.
How do you then stop general practice going that way and pull things back to the intention? There's surely enough creative interpretation of the HWC as it is?
When the kid asks to pull over and the father says no...as a dad that breaks my heart. Little kids voice. He even wabbles towards the oncoming car. Tough stuff to watch.
He didnt wobble
@@steve00alt70 He wobbled.
@Nothing The oncoming driver was to blame mate.
Highway code is clear on it. Yes priority means nothing if you're 6 feet under but if we're attributing blame to something that happened. It's the driver at fault here.
As Surrey Roads Policing unit has commented and as other traffic police have commented. Driver should have given way to the oncoming cyclists.
@@lmaoroflcopter that attitude is exactly the problem.
The dad has issues.
The adults are consumed with the politics of the situation - the cyclist seething that motorists don't give bikes priority as they should, the motorist barging through thinking he's the most important thing on the road. The kid has the most sense because he isn't contaminated by any of that, he just sees escalating danger and asks if she should take action - but is also intelligent enough to trust in his Dad's greater knowledge and experience and so follows instructions.
Why do you think the motorist should give the bike priority ? The bike has much less kinetic energy to lose , and needed to restart , than any motor vehicle .
It is just like when I am out in my car and am confronted by a 38 tonne Artic coming the other way ; I will always stop for the Artic ; just as with a car and a bike , there will only ever be one winner if a car and an Artic have a coming together .
The inverse is true. The motorist only has to move their foot one inch to regain momentum, while the cyclist has to do real effort. Your arctic tanker argument is a fallacy: they actually move other stuff than the just the driver.
Shame his dad let him down, he should of agreed with his son when he asked should he pull over.
Great analysis, Ashley! From 5:15 of your video is the most important part in my opinion. The fact that the father was happy to let his child "carry on" was just as concerning as the opposite driver plowing through the pinch point.
Actually, I think it's of greater concern, he's teaching his child to ignore his instincts of danger.
@@mintywebb Having right of way doesn't mean you should take it regardless. You need to assess situations and respond, to ensure your safety and mitigate other's mistakes or bull-headedness. In this example the child assessed a potential problem, the father dismissed it and over-ruled his response to avoid danger. "I had right of way" is not a good epitaph.
As for victim's of sexual assault? No, I blame those who commit the crime, and the mentality of 'boys will be boys' excusing their behaviour. Mind you, I'm biased, it's taken a lot of therapy to stop blaming myself. I was raised when "what does she expect dressed like that?" was a societal norm. Oh, and if you're wondering what I was wearing that so provoked a man, it was a school uniform, I was 12.
@@mintywebb OK, let's clarify. Yes, the driver is at fault; he should've given way, I'm not disputing that. I'm concerned the father teaching his son to overrule his sense of self preservation, putting his life at risk.
@@mintywebb The child read the danger, the dad made him carry on into that dangerous situation. He got what he wanted, a flashpoint that he could film as he has done countless times on his social media. the dad can clearly see the motorist isn't going to stop. This is where you have to be smart and the dad isn't. You cannot influence what the other driver does but you can influence the risk of injury to yourself or someone else by the decisions you take.
In this instance the driver should have stopped but its clear to a five year old that the car is going to keep on going. |Because of that the father is also wrong to put his child in a dangerous situation just for his own ego. this whole 'i have the right of way' means absolutely nothing in the real world when you have two tonne of vehicle coming in the opposite direction. Easier to forget about massaging your own ego and pull over where safe. Because in events like this where you have two points of self entitlement there is only going to be one winner. And it ain't the kid on the pushbike.
Smart people live to fight another day.
@@mintywebb “so you’re prepared to victim blame in one situation but not your own” are you for real? Wtf is that response, using SA as a petty point scoring comment. Sick. Proper dickhead comment that. Petty as hell.
Up until this 5:35 i was thinking that i am going to have to disagree with Ashleys way of thinking, but fair play you eventually said EXACTLY what i was thinking to myself. I would rather submit than risk my sons life, as there ain't no glory in saying it was your right of way when your child is in a coffin!
Fantastic analysis, totally agree. I'm especially pleased you wholeheartedly approved of teaching kids road safety instead of that knee jerk "they shouldn't be anywhere near a road" reaction.
I absolutely agree with you Ashley. You should also add the risk of target fixation here, As the car approaches you can see the child start to move towards the vehicle. He sees the vehicle and he moves towards it for a split second. Thankfully he regains his line and avoids the car.
Love this break down and fully agree with every single point made as a cyclist. I do have a pet peeve for those who automatically believe they have the right of way in these type of situations and continue (we are all guilty of it I guess) but it’s those who act out in aggression either by driving recklessly or genuinely abusive. As long as either party continues to keep safe and respect those on the road whether in the wrong or not then the roads will be a safer place. Conflict causes more danger in my eyes.
Average UK car driver who thinks the road belongs to them, cycling will never be safe in this country
@@mattdavies55 And the dad is the worst kind of cyclist who believes that they have no responsibility for their own safety.
I agree with the analysis. My only thought playing devils advocate would be that maybe the father of the boy was worried about him stopping. Perhaps he knew the boy was fine while moving as you said but sometimes was a bit wobbly stopping and he didn't want him to fall off into the path of the oncoming car while trying to stop in a tricky spot? Sometimes it's safer to keep moving?
Absolutely nailed it right there. To stop in that situation would have been arguably more dangerous - the kid was riding a really straight line at the speed he was going
Child probably shouldn't be on the road if he can't safely do the emergency stop
That just demonstrates that the child should not be cycling on a busy road
I'm absolutely 100% in agreement with you Ashley on this one.
Kudos to the child for being the only one with some common sense, if it doesn't get "educated" out of him he will go far.
Iv picked up Ashley's attitude to the road well over the past year and have become a cyclist people don't mind sharing the road with. It's like penguins of Madagascar, (smile and wave. )I got T,boned at 30mph a couple of months back in a bike lane when a car ran a no entry so it won't save you all the time but giving right of way does cut the risk to everyone somewhat.
This mindset change will have a bigger impact on road safety than any infrastructure you can possibly build. A good road user can negotiate through a tricky situation simply and easily.
Thanks for not blaming the child on this one Ashley as they seemed to be the ones perceiving the danger. Just because you should have priority, it doesn't always mean it's safe to carry on regardless.
Thanks Ashley. I have commented on this on twitter and have had a change of heart over whether that child should have been on the road.
I was concerned that the cycle lanes were flooded and it wasn't safe, but I taught my kids to ride on the road the same way.
This is the first time I heard the child say "Shall I pull over to the side?" and I would have said "yes" because the life of my child comes before being proved right. As for the driver? Well, there was a point where he would have lost sight of that child. The very least he could have done was stopped until he was visible again. But as I said on twitter, there are some really bad "drivers" out there.
John Casserly ... yes, there are some really bad "drivers" out there ... that's why a five-year-old child should not be riding on a public road!
Excellent video, I totally agree. My father taught me that you "don't play games on the road" and "it's not just what you do but what other people do that can cause accidents". Whilst the driver was to blame, why on earth the father would send his son on to seemingly make a point is beyond me. Any driver prepared to do this is best avoided, it might hurt our pride but often backing down makes for a better journey.
Just to play devil's advocate, if this 5yr old had to slow down and stop, he might have become unstable and ended up placing his right foot on the ground and leaning into the oncoming traffic which showed no signs of stopping.
Agreed. That's why the slowing needed to be done earlier also.
Exactly. In this situation, there wasn't really time to do anything different. What I would have done differently, would be to cycle alongside the child, 2 abreast, to try and manage the danger from oncoming vehicles.
@@ashley_neal
This is why children should be allowed to ride on the pavement.
@@Robert-cu9bm everyone is allowed to ride on the pavement with care, it’s effectively been decriminalised for years since the NPCC released guidelines.
@@shm5547 Rule 64
You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement.
Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A sect 129
But it's still illegal, you would effectively be teaching children to break laws.
The more small minor laws you break, the easier it becomes to break bigger laws.
Then people wonder why young adults have no respect for the law.
This is utterly shocking ; for any parent to take such a young child cycling in such hazardous conditions is beyond irresponsible . When my children were that age , they were taken cycling in public parks , along seaside promenades , always completely away from any traffic .
Ashley commented on the oncoming driver being too close to parked vehicles on his side - well so was the child on the bike : what if someone had stepped from behind one of the parked vans ; another child , or an angry dog ... that little boy would have veered right into the path of the oncoming car .
The father SHOULD have instructed his son to wait until the road was completely clear before proceeding through the gap , especially as it was clear how little space there was going to be . Another failure is him encouraging the boy to ride through the traffic lane instead of using the cycle lanes to each side of the islands : these are designed to separate drivers and cyclists and to allow drivers to pass while cyclists are kept to the side .
Sadly , the woke advocates who want everyone else to give them priority will keep trying to make themselves seem more important . It is a nonsense that everyone else should take responsibility for cyclists and pedestrians : the vulnerable can NEVER rely on others looking out for them - that is why so many end up dead - the only system which works is to teach cyclists to watch out for their own safety and take action to protect themselves .
That poor excuse for a father is guilty of child endangerment and a pathetic example of parenthood .
Responsibility for all lies with all. There was also no cycle Lane, those are gates rendered useless and more dangerous to the child by the parked vehicles.
Your last paragraph is juvenile nonsense.
I’ve been cycling to work for over a year now and it’s amazing how many close calls you have because motorists feel they have priority over a measley push bike when they should be giving way.
Of course if the blockage is on their side but they have nowhere to pull in to let me through I’ll just stop and let them through like any reasonable person would
Yeah as to who goes first. I'm generally of the sense that if my lane has the parked car, I wait for oncoming to pass before moving into what is THEIR side of the road. If both sides are blocked, we take turns or act like the other person will not be stopping. (Go when you know the other person is yielding). That being said, while cycling everyone is out to kill you. Though not literally true, I tend to act as though it is. The car can be completely at fault, but if I'm dead it hardly matters.
When I learned to ride a motorcycle in the 80s, the instructor made the point of saying it's no good saying it was your right of way lying in a hospital bed. Giving way to someone is better than getting hurt
The only additional observation I would make is that perhaps a late brake action from the cyclists may have unsettled the bikes and caused the child (particularly) to fall off just as the car approached. (Wet roads). That might have been in the father's mind too. However if they'd stopped when the child first asked then the risk of this happening would have been much lower as the level of braking would have been lower.
Completely agree with this. And it’s very easy to critique after analysing a video
Couldn't agree more, the child is the only one with sense.
Bikes committed first (I guess I'm incorrect) but as a general rule, I think this works.
But no way would I have squeezed through and would have let them pass first no matter what.
People seem unable to judge when they will come and meet
The only thing I would say is that sometimes telling a child to brake quickly could destabilise them and put them in more danger
“Here lies the body of William Jay, Who died maintaining his right of way- He was right, dead right, as he sped along, But he’s just as dead as if he were wrong.”
"The hills are alive! Of the Twitter cyclists screeching!" 🎵
Thank you Ronnie for this quote - never heard it all before, just "Jimmy Jay died defending his rigjt of way" which my Mum used to say to us all when teaching us road sense (walking !!) thanks again 💯✔👍💖
I fully agree with the analysis, and I will specifically say again, in my state, the verbiage of the highway code is that a motorist must allow a cyclist enough room that the cyclist can fall down without being hit by the car. I like the verbiage because it is quite clear.
Agree 100% With what you say, Ashley.
The Dad could learn a few things from the Kid.
....now for the headline...."Ex Foot......................
@@ashley_neal 😄 I await it.
@Ashley Neal I see we keep getting the headline wrong now.😄
Good to see this particular Analysis on Cc.👍
@Ashley Neal I see you have been causing a stir with the establishment, Ash.😄
One could say the child hasn't been 'corrupted' by being an adult road user and the attitudes that brings. The kid still has the natural tendency of self-preservation that screamed danger when faced with this situation. The father, who has probably been in many dangerous situations on the road, has become more numb to this instinct unless a collision is imminent. He is effectively teaching his son to ignore that internal scream of danger as he does himself. It does sometimes seem like something we're meant to do.
I had a similar situation the other day where I could stay on my side of the road to pass a parked car at the bottom of a hill. I had just cycled down a hill and I was doing 30-40 km/h (20-25 mph), but I was about to cycle up the hill ahead. I saw the parked car on my side of the road, I saw the oncoming car, and I had the scream of danger going off in my head. For some reason I decided keeping my momentum was more important as I didn't want to start up on the hill. I was able to stay on my side, the oncoming driver had their entire lane, my speed was slowed by the hill, but there wasn't enough room for it to be safe. I've been thinking about it since, especially the oncoming driver's smile -- I wonder what about the situation amused her -- either blissfully unaware or gleefully keeping going to teach me a lesson?
I have to say I agree 100% with everything you say here.
When I'm in a situation like this, who I think has priority very much takes 2nd place to avoiding the risk altogether. As either the driver or the cyclist here I would have yielded.
It wouldn't have happened if I was driving or riding either.
@@ashley_neal im a hgv driver of 20 years, no serious crash, 2 minor bumps, i have learned, its not what i should do and its not whats law, its what the other idiot does.
seeing what iv seen, i would not take 5 year old on road
I understand your comments about the father, saying carry on when maybe he could have called a stop, but if he told the child to stop, would that have led to a wobble and maybe fall into the path of the oncoming car ?
My worst experience cycling through one of those pinch-points was when a car tried to pass me, but it wasn't until I heard him that I knew he wasn't going to stop. Wouldn't have been quite so scary if I didn't have bags of groceries from the supermarket on both sides of the carrier (because my car was out of action)!
When I used to cycle in town, I'd get out into the middle of the lane going through a pinch-point (after doing a rear ob), then pull over to the left as soon as I was clear so following cars could pass safely and quickly.
With the cyclists on the country lane, providing the oncoming car is on his side of the road there is no need for him to slow down...the cyclists don't have to ride so irresponsibly close together...if one wobbled or had a tyre pop he could bring all his mates down. The can see the oncoming car and should give it space.
I am sure the father now realises he gave his son the wrong answer. Hopefully this will be a learning curve for him. I personally never took my son out cycling on a road. No matter how well you instruct - the unpredictable can always happen. We always went to parks to cycle and he does not own a cycle now he is grown. I have a bicycle which I take to coastal paths etc and I generally do not cycle on roads as I consider it is too dangerous.
Maybe the father genuinely thought it was better to keep going. People, especially kids, can wobble when they stop a bicycle.
Exactly. The dad only had a small amount of time make a decision. He may have made the wrong decision, but not necessarily out of stubbornness or entitlement
Maybe you're right, but the kid was alert to the situation and would have had plenty of time to stop safely and not wobble. Especially considering how well he rode in a straight line whilst turning his head
The fathers an idiot, its obvious he was just being stubborn
@@Daniel-ug3ie Yep, he's a good kid, but I think his Dad knows him better than us.
Having watched the clip a couple of times, for me there are three thoughts:
1 - That street is crying out for a segregated cycleway, preferably as part of a combined thru-routes and 'safe routes to schools' network. Such would at a stroke remove the conflict which caused the questions raised.
2 - The cycling bypass, which is infrastructure built until I think the 1980s, is even more out of date than that, and illustrates how little attention we pay to maintenance / updating. A practice that needs to be fixed.
3 - This and Ashley's recent unfit-to-drive video illustrate the need for continuing driver education / monitoring.
Two weeks ago a 74 year old pensioner Arthur Robert McGrillen was given a 2.5 year prison sentence for killing one person on a bike with his car, and seriously injuring another. He had failed to self-disclose a stroke when renewing his driving license.
Two months ago an 82 year old pensioner Peter Gardner was given 6 months in prison for killing a 70 year old on a bike when he could only read a number plate at 10ft.
I suggest that the current system does not work, and would not actually be that expensive to fix - very little work for a GP nurse to do a rapid go/no go check, an refer to the GP if necessary.
On the clip I'd suggest that this driver will continue causing risks to other people unless educated somehow. I'd suggest a re-evaluation every 10 years when photocard is renewed, or far more widespread camera enforcement and courses.
There was a startingly similar case, with a similar vid, when a 28 year old mountain guide called Jake David Tomkinson received a jail sentence when he fell asleep at the after he decided to drive home after an all night trek on Snowdon, rather than check into a hotel for a sleep.
I agree completely with everything you said. I live in a city with an excellent cycle network, and I'll take a longer route on the cycle path if it means staying off the roads. There's an unattractive bolshy streak that's very apparent today, with so many people thinking that they're the exception to every rule and they can do what they want. As you pointed out, the only person not displaying that attitude was the 5 year old, and they were the student in the situation. The child only asked if they should pull in because they had assessed the danger and felt unsafe. I would advise that if they had to ask the question, the answer is yes, you should pull in to the side.
It's very easy to get into that argument of "who has right of way", and there are a lot of drivers out there who have taken umbrage to the change in law that gives the more vulnerable party right of way. Don't they know that driver owns the road and is the only person who should be on it? I've met plenty of drivers like that out and about. It's a big part of the reason why I stopped driving and stick to cycling.
There has NOT been a change in law ; only an ill conceived change in advice . In this situation both parties have right of way , and also equal priority .
@@derekheeps1244 As the video points out, right of way is given, not taken and that nobody has "right of way". The law favours the most vulnerable party in the situation, which is inarguably the 5 year old child and not your ego. You do not own the road, and you have the responsibility to conduct yourself with all due care and attention while you are driving on it. Since when did it become ok to forget your manners as soon as you sit down behind a steering wheel?
Imagine if the driver of the oncoming car was the same one as in Ashleys ' Unfit to Drive' video.
Having priority and proving a point for social media clicks doesn't stop you or your child getting killed.
There are lot of older drivers with very poor eyesight and no awareness of anything around them.
@@mintywebb What is wrong with you?
"I'm very sorry dear, I'm afraid our little Billy died in a traffic accident when I took him out cycling. He was hit by an oncoming car after I told him to keep going when Billy asked if he should stop. We had priority though!"
"I'm very sorry dear, I'm afraid I was held up on my way home because I killed a child on a bike. You see although he had priority, and was vulnerable, I decided I'm more important and so I wanted to go, and my car is bigger than a child on a bike anyway."
@@jackw7714 "the funny part tho is that the child didnt actually have priority nor enough brains to stop after seeing a car, probably because he was a 5 year old and shouldnt have been on the road in the first place, especially during that weather. only the fittest survive"
Starting with your analysis; I agree wholeheartedly.
Addressing some of the other comments I've seen elsewhere:
1) The child shouldn't be on the road.
I still remember coming home from playing when I was about 5 to find a police car on the drive. A neighbour had complained that I was cycling on the path. The policeman explained that he'd come round so that the neighbour would see they'd responded, but he wanted to explain to me that he'd much rather I was cycling on the path than on the road as he wanted me to be safe. My point here is that it's actually illegal for the cyclist to cycle on the footpath - even if they're five. I suspect the same people complaining that the 5 year old should be on the road would also be quick to complain about cyclists on a footpath.
2) It's a main road and it's meant for cars not five year old cyclists.
It's clearly a residential area with traffic calming and houses adjacent to the road. It's not a main road.
Priority is given not taken but should ALWAYS be given to more vulnerable road users under law.
The analogy of Running around a swimming pool is horribly wrong, this is more like walking around a swimming pool while an adult runs around it in the other direction, running is wrong whoever does it and the child did nothing wrong!
This is just one of the reasons that I will cycle alongside my kids in preference to behind them until they're more experienced
If dad had been alongside then the driver simply would not have been able to to bully through. Also protects from idiot close passes / left hooks coming from behind
Too many times where my assumption that drivers would give some consideration to a child was shown to be horribly misplaced, so now I actively remove every opportunity i can for people to drive badly in a way that risks my kids lives.
Still happens, sadly - but much less.
The kid saw the situation developing before the adults.😄😅😄😅
"Shall I pull over to the side?" At 5 years old? This kid is going places.
True. The child 'learner' was the most competent road user!
no, I don't think so, the kid was just asking about priority at the parked vehicles, which the father correctly told him it was their right of way.
@@shm5547 There's no such thing as 'right of way' in these cases. The principle is 'priority'. And if you've watched Ashley's videos, you'll know how priority should be managed.
@@tarnmonath but when you're teaching kids cycling, they are always asking should I stop, who has priority etc. The first, most basic thing, is to teach them the rules. Only then do you move onto managing risk from rule breakers. The only thing the father could do better here, is to ride 2 abreast with his kid to do that defensive cycling for them. A point Ashley completely missed.
Social services should be involved with this.
In this situation with the child cyclist there is no excuse for the actions of the oncoming car driver.
I watched this on the Blackbeltbarrister and made a similar comment regarding priorities. I said that I cringe , when I here somebody say : "I've got the right of way ". Some approaching drivers either don't know, or simply don't care , or are under the influence, and drive on regardless expecting me to give way ( which I do ). I'm please that your strike has been removed.
The lad has shown he is very bright and capable of listening to, and following, instructions. You have to learn to ride on the road at some stage, the earlier the better. Cyclists put themselves at risk every time they use our roads as we share them with larger, faster and heavier vehicles. I don't think the parent has done anything wrong personally.
As a teacher, I am impressed with the question of the child. Further I agree with your assessment Ashley.
A little point on the side and offtopic. 6 months ago you and I where talking about a Cruyff-shirt you where wearing. As a Dutchman I was proud to see that. Little did I know, sorry about that, what I found out a few days ago, that you where a professional footballplayer. Now I really understand the shirt! Keep on going with these video's. They are educational for everyone. In and outside of the UK.
The kind of parent then when taking their child to the hospital, keeps saying "but we was in the right" 😡
I am glad you put that last bit in. Completely agree 👍
Do what's safe. They 'should' stop, doesn't mean they 'will' stop.
Coming from a country with 23,4 million bicycles and a population of 17,5 Million people I see this:
The father missed the opportunity to have the child ride between the curb and himself.
This is very common in the Netherlands as it creates a safe(r) space for the child on the road.
It would als have given an extremely clear signal to the oncoming car they are expected to wait.
In the event the oncoming car still barges trough, the father can always steer to the left and push/knock the child over in the direction of the curb into safety.
so you have 6 million bicycles sat around doing nothing😉
I also thought that the adult should have been over to the right of his child because he would be much more visible to traffic
@@MrSabretooth19 Have you looked outside some train stations in the Netherlands?
I'm English but I remember seeing over a thousand bikes outside of a station in Utrecht, and it would've been impossible to get to "your" bike, as they were 50 deep and all leaning against each other up to a wall
So I do believe that you can have more bikes than people in a country
@@MrSabretooth19 Not really. It is fairly common to have a normal (daily) bike and a recreational bike like a mountain bike, race bike or even a cargo bike. It is just the dutch equivalent to an American having daily driver, pickup truck and quad.
The car did not barge through any more than the cyclists did .
Absolutely agree with you on this one, Ashley. The little cyclist did a great job in this clip! Most car drivers don't seem to like giving way to cyclists apparently, even if they're little kids.
my tuppence worth is the cyclist reached the parked cars (not the pinch point) long before the car, therefore they were already commited to the passing manoeuvre, irrespective of whether its a cyclist, hgv, bus, pedestrian or car the oncoming driver should have given way and who the hell tries to squeeze past a young child on a bike
Totally Agree. This is the first time I’ve seen this clip with sound. What an amazing young man that child is going to grow into
Absolutely spot in as usual. There is definitely advice missing regarding oncoming cyclists, the current advice only covers overtaking.
This is especially common on narrow one lane country roads, as I cyclist I try to take secondary when faced with a motor vehicle that cannot possibly pass me safely, but some drivers don't slow down and think they have priority, when of course neither road user actually does. Relying on common sense is insufficient (as too many road users lack it).
Can’t argue with a lot said here! The lad’s body language clearly displayed a lack of self confidence approaching the hazard as his pedalling stroke momentarily ‘stuttered’. His verbalisation reiterated this uncertainty.
Now, my own Father always taught me to treat all other road users as being blind, or at best, idiots! “Presume they have not, and will not see you” were his last words…just before the number 189 bus ran him over!!
But seriously, that advice is sound advice and 30yrs riding motorcycles and still being in one piece is partly down to Dad’s words.
I was slightly concerned that the Father of the child did not verbalise anything about the car reversing into the road at the end of the clip. This Father seems to me to be very reactive, when cycling with a child being taught Road sense, surely proactivity is the more desirable approach!
Being Devil’s Advocate, the driver might have been a little surprised seeing a 5 year old in front of him and might not quite been able to judge his speed, and got himself into a bit of a quandary and ended up ****ing things up. What I find quite worrying about this is would that child be easily spotted by someone opening a van or car door? Has anyone got any experience of that?
This is why I'm subscribed to this channel. Ashley does not pull any punches. An accurate and honest assessment if I ever heard one.
Hey Ash. This video has almost bought me to tears. I completely agree with your comments. Hats off to the lad, listen to your kids guys. This one will go far!
Should the motorist not have stopped and waited before the traffic calming chicane, as the sign is set up as "give way for oncoming vehicles" in the direction the motorist was coming from?
Ashley, I totally agree with you. Personally, I'm always terrified for young kids when they are on the road on their scooters or bikes. It only takes one entitled crazy driver to turn a family's life upside down. I would rather kids used the pavement; sensibly, of course. I know that pavements users get very possessive of the pavement, but I think if we all tried we could share the pavement peacefully. We just need to care enough for each other.
The problem is that car driver are also very possessive of the streets and roads. "Bicycles don't belong here!" Car drivers must learn that streets and roads are not made for them to get as fast as possible from A to B. They must adjust to road users like bicyclists when they are in residential streets like this.
And I knew that most comments in here would be on what the bicyclists were doing wrong instead of what the car driver was doing wrong, even when the car dirver is posessing a murder weapon, his car.
If cyclists just used the pavement too many drivers would see this as a green light to continue driving poorly. We need to educate drivers which is difficult because most drivers don't believe they can be better. Many cyclists feel that way too.
Had that been me, I would always be cycling /further out/ into the road (yet still behind) than my boys on their bikes. This provides the opportunity for greater visibility and safety and also means the cyclists occupy a greater portion of the field of view for the oncoming driver. Also, had the father done this and chosen to instructed the boy to carry on in the way that he did, he would have ensured that he himself was at greater risk from oncoming vehicles or vehicles behind trying overtake, than the little boy, and that's really how it ought to be. Having said that, there remains the argument that if cyclists don't on occasions attempt to take priority when it certainly should be theirs, cyclists would forever be stopping for arrogant drivers. I'm afraid drivers (and I'm a driver - I barely cycle these days) do need to be taken to task on this. I think the Highway Code should be much more forthright on obliging large vehicles to yield to more vulnerable road users. So many drivers just don't give a flying fig about "giving priority".
Top notch - as always.
Ego and stubbornness could easily have resulted in a fatality here.
I agree - full credit to the Child who displayed more sense than the "so called" Adults.
Stay safe out there.
Spot on, Graham! 👍
@@Jonc25 Respect, bud 👍
As a cyclist myself, you are totally correct to say priority is given. After all, your life is on the line and if there's any doubt, you must slow down and stop if necessary.
Whilst I agree with you, I think there's a tendency for cyclists to do this because as vulnerable road users they don't want to be bullied by motorists which is understandable given how dangerous the roads can be if they allow that to happen.
fair enough but do that when you don't have a child with you
I agree with your take. I think an alternative dad could have taken would be to position further right. People see a gap that is physically big enough for their vehicle and go for it.
He recognised well that the motorist should have held back and the meeting point couldn't be shared, if he was assertive by taking up the centre of the gap and so "asking for priority" I think the motorist would have done the correct thing
100% with you on this one, Ashley. I did wonder if we were going to see something horrific when I saw the car continue toward the cyclists, glad it didn't turn out that way. That young man is quite a smart kid and has obviously had some experience of cycling already.
I disagree with the assessment of the dad. Suddenly telling his kid to stop may cause him to swerve or even fall. Startling such a young biker can be dangerous in a situation like this. Otherwise spot on analysis!
the kid literally asked if he should pull to the side, dad was at the fault here (plus the car driver)
I’m in total agreement that public roads are for everyone, including supervised five year olds on bicycles. But the father should understand self preservation comes first. A bit like crossing a one-way street; always look both ways
The father clearly did understand that hence the supervision.
Its great to see that the five year old had better risk assessment capacity that the father, "shall I pull over"
"Plainly and simply the driver should have given way but instead they barge through a narrowing and endangered the life of a five-year-old,"
I think Neal's opinion & the sentiment in the UA-cam piece, this time, is a very good, heartfelt, and an honest summary of how car drivers should behave/don't behave towards others. Also, he talks with conviction, together with frank concern, on how ‘us’ cyclists should react when drivers do not think of safety beyond their own.
His point is that cyclists do not have the safe capability to "barge" - however much I/we want/do this.
As soon as the parent said - ‘carry on to his child’ despite it being clear the car wasn’t going to stop - The parent, typical. Yes, we can all hope drivers were amazing and didn’t make mistakes. I don’t understand this, why put yourself into a dangerous situation just because you know you are right.
About letting your child ride in front of you: There was a case where a child on a bike riding in front of her went forward at a junction and was killed and her mother could do nothing. I think this was 2010 or a year earlier. I always understood after that that a child should ride behind the adult?
Absolute nonsense. If there was a clear opportunity for the child to pull over when it became clear the car wasn’t going to stop you might have a point- but by the time it was obvious the car was carrying on the child was next to the white van and there was no opportunity to pull over so carrying on was the safest option. If the child had pulled over there he would more than likely have overbalanced and would be more likely to fall into the oncoming car than if he had carried on riding. And to label the father as blasé about his child’s safety on the basis of this clip is staggering. I’m not one of the “I’ve got priority” brigade as you put it, but I think the father did exactly the right thing here in a very short window to make a decision - the least chance of a collision was for the child to hold their riding line. To pull over so near parked vehicles would likely have panicked him more. To put any blame at all on the father here is what I’d call victim blaming
Your opinions on road collisions like this are the best and most thought out well Ashley.
As a motorist passing kids (or animals), no matter if they're on the sidewalk or road, moving or stopped. you need to expect the unexpected. The kid can actually stop and lose balance and fall over, or as the speed drops their path can actually get more erratic as it's harder to stay upright.
One of the big issues I'm seeing on british roads (through video's online) is that there's no respect for other road users. It's mostly "Me, me and me" and nobody or nothing is allowed to slow me down for a second.
Other people are treated as objects, not humans. Generally motorists tend to pass people on foot or bicycle like they are street furniture, which really gets shown off when people pass a cyclist, and 2 seconds later take a left turn. There's no way you didn't see the cyclist, it just doesn't seem to register in their brain that they are also moving objects and they're cutting someone off by doing that.
And it's not just something that's happening in the GB, but GB just stands out as one of the extremes at the moment. There needs to be an attitude change in society.
@@zbf5h89ftb Oh that's true, but it doesn't negate the video's online where a lot of people still seem to be absolutely oblivious of other road users. It's a problem that's getting worse at an alarming rate, and steps need to be taken to counter it.
Looking closely, it looks like the driver slightly pinged the parked car's mirror shut with what might be a delayed noise of it hitting the car.
Agree mostly with you AN - apart from fact that many of my friends say father is still irresponsible for taking child on residential road, in wet conditions, getting child at young age to ride on these street in mixed and rainy slippery conditions and putting child very much in danger.
Totally agree with your observations and assessment. We need more cyclists like the 5 year old. Let’s hope he keeps the same mentally as he grows up
One can only assume that this father hates his child and has decided to put his life at great risk....has he even seen the standard of the average driver on our roads?
That kid should be teaching his dad how to cycle 🤣
I'd be hesitant to come to a complete stop in that situation as the father, as that isn't entirely safe either. By stopping at a pinch point, you're less visible against the parked cars; and so traffic may be less likely to see you and therefore giveway, creating a more dangerous situation.
I too would probably have pulled in to avoid the dangerous car but by doing so you've got less options to avoid a collision if the car continues to encroach, at least if you get hit you've somewhere to fall and are not simply crushed between the parked cars and the oncoming car.
Cyclist since the age of about 5 ( pure coincidence it's the age of the child in this clip) and a driver for a little over 35 years, including almost 20 as a commercial driver. Also trained to be a Cat B driving instructor - didn't quite make it, down to terrible nerves, but I won't go into all that!
As always, great analysis by Ashley and I have nothing but praise for your opinions and advice. I try to follow what you say and advise when driving ; the truth is that we all make mistakes and poor judgment calls on the road. I don't believe there's such a thing as a perfect driver, but we can strive to be safe and competent. After all, if F1 drivers can make mistakes from time to time, what chance do we regular drivers have!
I have an idea - it's quite radical I know, but how about the government introducing a short cycling segment into the driving test? I don't mean miles and miles, but maybe 10 - 15 minutes on a few roads near the test center. You would be followed by an examiner possibly on an electric bike ( similar to motorcycle instructors) giving directions on residential and or more busy roads before continuing the test in the car. I say this as it would allow candidates to 'feel' what it's like to be the vulnerable road user ; perhaps this would help reduce the contempt SOME motorists have for cyclists?
It probably will never happen of course, but I'd love to hear what Ashley and other viewers think?
As Ashley usually says..
" Stay safe" and have a good day everyone 😉
F1 is a little different because if you don't occasionally push too hard, they are not trying hard enough.
But I agree that we all make mistakes, but how many of us either fail to notice awkward situations or ask ourselves "how could I have done better?".
@@TheRip72
Good point! Can't answer for everyone of course, but believe you me, I've had plenty of "oops" moments - still do!
Absolutely agree. In some (actually, most) situations there's more than one person at fault. In this one, there are two - the adults.
Some years ago, I did a driving assessment of an employee. On our side of the road was a parked car, there wasn't enough room for two cars to pass each other alongside the parked car. Approaching us were two cars, separated by a distance. The driver being assessed, correctly waited for the first car to come through, then pulled out into the face of the second oncoming car, forcing it to brake. I asked why they had done that, their reply was "I waited my turn". Of course, I had to explain, there was no such thing as having a turn, and duly failed the assessment, on the grounds of unsafe manoeuvre.
Do remember during the give way bit, there are cycle lanes for cycles to use.
If they did then their speed and angles would’ve been different.
IMO this demonstrates that this father is trying to teach (his far more sensible child) to use the "I'm entitled, my road too, never back down..." mentality that some have (not just cyclist btw). I think Ashley got this one 100%. But I would like to add an observation on the latter part of the video that he did not cover. If it were my child (or myself for that matter) I would be seriously planning to slow down or stop as they approach the reversing silver car. We just don't know and must not assume what that reversing car is going to do. As a motorcyclist I always assume a driver has NOT seen me and WILL do something stupid, careless or even aggressive. Like for instance reversing down the road into a parking space or driveway ..... Rushing headlong into a hazard even if it's your right of way is how risk escalates into harm.
Reversing from a minor into a major road ...isn't that an offence?
@@richardsimpson3792 Indeed, though I don't know which of those roads at that junction is would be classified as major or minor. In any case I don't think "..But you were on a minor road..' is a valid defence for a person accused of reversing over another.
@@JayMoog Well, reversing into someone is clearly going to be an offence...but I thought the act of reversing onto a major from a minor was an offence in itself...although reversing out of a driveway is not.
I mean the kid made the most sensible judgement call out of all of them when he said should I pull over. Daddy cyclist was a knob for forcing his child to carry in when he was clearly uncomfortable with the situation.
Glad you've done this Ash, I had the exact same opinion as you but saying it on twitter would just get people saying I'm an angry motorist.
The kid has every right to be there and is fine, but I wouldn't want my kid barrelling into a pinch point even with "priority". I wouldn't put my car in that position, if there was space, never mind my child.
Yeah you’re right, kid spotted the danger and naturally wanted to avoid it, his thought process was about keeping himself safe and not who’s in the right. Unfortunately a lot of cyclists (and drivers, but less likely to be injured) seem to put themselves in danger just because they believe they have the right of way. I posted on the clip originally I don’t understand why anyone on a bike would put themselves or others in harms way, a person v car situation the person is always coming off worse and no amount of finger pointing afterwards will help bring someone back from the possible worst outcome.
I very much agree with what you've said, when i saw the video a few days back i was shocked that when the little kid asked if he should stop and pull over the father said no carry on, clearly the child saw the potential danger (or was scared of the situation) while the father just wanted to go through regardless of it it put his child at risk because he was in the 'right' and the driver was in the 'wrong'.