Cycling in the time of Corona

How often do recreational cyclists require hospital treatment? In my opinion, very irregularly.

What I'm asking myself:

And in some cases, including the Strava account in the Tweet below, the French police have left messages on users’ accounts notifying them they have been fined €135 for contravening the ban on cycling.

How exactly do they do that? Presumably it only works if someone has their full name and their address on there, and is otherwise identifiable on the profile, no?

It’s...bollocks made up nonsense in the eternal battle for clicks likes and shares

Are Strava dollars not a real currency then?

The irony is that the general population is probably healthier now than in years. What with teenagers, who would be on buses etc, cycling to the shops, families out riding and walking together in greater numbers, far fewer fast food options.

Data access request from the police to get credit card details for premium members of Strava? Probably would cost more than 135 euros in police time though

It really is awesome seeing so many families out exercising together. If only a small percentage of this sticks, it will be a huge public health win for the future.

Is this kind of thing legal for a company to do, just pass on your details? Especially as it's not a prosecution for something like a murder, but just 'who should pay this fine'?

My heart sinks every day when I look at this thread and there's five new pages of sermonising shit...

If folk banning cycling are going to do it anyway-and you recognise this will be an arbitrary irrational/kneejerk reaction-then there's really no fucking point endlessly preaching about it as if we should all be self flaggelating at home for the sins of 'the few who will ruin it.'

Given they can request your details from a car hire company for parking fines, I don't see this as much different. I can't be bothered finding the wording of the regulations but it's also possible it's a criminal offence rather than a civil one. Question is whether Strava would refuse to do it given they're based in the US.

Chances are more one of the following:
1, Someone trolling a mate
2, French police posting in the hope it generates paranoia in people and they stop

There's a load of accts purporting to being Police Nationale on Strava though so all/none of this could be real :)

Also saw a cyclist on Twatter who got bitten by a dog (of three that mobbed him including Great Dane) and the owners blamed him for being out. Will need medical treatment, and legally owners have no leg to stand on.

Such is the attitude of people in the UK, there's nothing to do about it.

My money is on trolling; whether its the police or mates. One of the accts flagged this run:

https://www.strava.com/activities/3148372797

A fine for something that occurred before the law was passed is something nobody would take seriously.

Chances are more one of the following:

1, Someone trolling a mate
2, French police posting in the hope it generates paranoia in people and they stop

Totally agreed. Or 3, the person who tweeted it did it themselves to get some clicks.

Here's my take.

There are two reasons restrictions will increase -

1. If the death rate keeps climbing government needs to be seen to be doing something. Increasing restrictions is much easier than magicking up 10,000 ventilators / 100,000 tests.

2. Increasing restrictions keeps the general population focused on the problem at hand.

I think the main theme of further restriction will be on distance from home. You will only be allowed to the nearest supermarket/pharmacy. Perhaps outdoor exercise will be limited to a couple of miles from your front door.

The second element will have some effect. While people riding their bikes 20 miles from home are not an epidemiological risk, the wider impact of tightening restrictions will help reinforce the whole idea of the necessity of social distancing amongst the population, just at the time people might have started to relax, had the current restrictions remained in place.

Sunday is going to be a media shit storm as everyone goes out to enjoy 20 degree's and sunshine for the first time in forever.

If I was in Government, I'd be tempted to ramp it up tonight...or at least put out some stark warnings out particularly focused on gatherings - that's where the transmission is going to be happening.

or at least put out some stark warnings out particularly focused on gatherings

Sure. The thing is though, those are already illegal now. But no law will have an impact if there is almost no enforcement.

But I agree with regards to 'need to be seen to do something'. Cynical, but probably very correct.

Either it's the law or it isn't.

This is a bit of a silly rule outside of a courtroom/mid-arrest though isn't it? There are plenty of things that are legal but stupid to do. Such as going out and licking door handles, which AFAIK is also not banned by the coronavirus legislation. Or tax avoidance.

Things get banned when there are enough people doing them that it's perceived to be a problem.

Edit: yeah why did I bother to write this? Bored, it's Friday, sorry

Interesting that this anecdotal interaction with a community officer that happened yesterday seams to support what you've been banging on about on here for over a week now.

It doesn’t take a clairvoyant or a genius (sorry @Stonehedge) to see where this is going.

We’re not so dissimilar to Spain or Italy and we’re a fortnight or so behind in our epidemic.

If frustration rises soft/symbolic targets for further clamp-downs on social freedoms are likely no? It will be more political than scientific.

If ministers act, an amplified voice will be the Daily Mails and cops talking to cops. It always is.

But no law will have an impact if there is almost no enforcement.

I think the most important part of the new laws are the ones banning gatherings, yet all we've heard in the news is how the police have been enforcing the unnecessary travel part - road checkpoints in Cumbria and drones over the peaks. This (i'd guess) is the easiest to do, but has the lowest impact on preventing transmission.

The police should be focusing on gatherings.

It's Orwellian, but on Sunday, I would not be bothered if they got the drones and police helicopter out to check out people's back gardens for illicit bbqs. Easy to spot if someone has more than the direct family in attendance, and a simple job to go knock on their door and break it up. Discouraging gatherings has to be top priority IMO.

Unless your jersey says "I'm from London, peasants!" on it and you stopped repeatedly to mock thatched roofing, I find it very hard to see how they would know.

The Rapha.

Are back gardens public places though?

Yeah sorry but I agree @Aroogah has a point although you don't have a sidebar of shame. Yet.

Does anybody have an opinion on why they think that the UK won't heavily restrict recreational cycling in the same way that Italy, France and Spain has? All three of them started with the same guidelines as the UK, and all three of them decided to take further action because of a perception that cyclists were taking the piss despite it being unlikely that it caused any problems.

Whats different here?

I don't know about Spain but I do know about Italy and the situation is really quite different to here.

This Cycling Podcast episode where they interview Marco Pinotti gives a pretty good summary of how the ban there ended up coming about (Bergamo is pretty much ground zero for coronavirus in Italy).
https://thecyclingpodcast.com/podcast/marco-pinotti-and-jonathan-vaughters-on-covid-19

You're right, the direct restriction on gatherings is only in public places (Article 7),

However, if you have left your house to attend a bbq at someone elses house, you will have contravened elements of Article 6, so the gathering would still be illegal*.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/350/pdfs/uksi_20200350_en.pdf

edit* there is the loop hole however that argues that if you initially leave your house to go to the shop (legal), but then while out, get a whatsapp from a mate asking if you want to come round for a beer and a burger, you technically are permitted by the law to do just that, as you didn't leave your house for that reason initially, and the act of leaving your house is the only thing that is specifically restricted.

I'd suggest this is a perverse interpretation, but is an example of why poor legislative drafting can be a major headache down the line.

Not if you went shopping for barbecue food first though. 🤔

And the gathering still wouldn't be illegal, but people who left their own house, with the sole intention of going to the BBQ, would have broken the law.

This is a bit of a silly rule outside of a courtroom/mid-arrest though isn't it? There are plenty of things that are legal but stupid to do. Such as going out and licking door handles, which AFAIK is also not banned by the coronavirus legislation. Or tax avoidance.

No it's not silly, that's the point. In plenty of other places they are specifically setting limits on exercise time, distance etc but in the UK (like with the "please don't go to pubs" thing), they're trying to avoid legislating which I doubt is down to hoping people do the right thing (whatever that is) and is more about a lack of willingness to upset people.