Cyclist suffers head injuries in Fulford Road crash (From York Press)
Get in touch: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting YORK to 80360 or send an email»
Cyclist suffers head injuries in Fulford Road crash
9:10am Tuesday 20th April 2010 in News
A CYCLIST was taken to hospital with head injuries after a collision with a car in York.
The crash happened at the junction of Cemetery Road with Fulford Road at 3.30pm yesterday.
The cyclist, a man is his 50s, was taken to hospital suffering head and neck injuries, although they were not believed to be life-threatening.
The woman driving the green Ford Focus car was uninjured.
There were minor delays on the road while the accident was cleared.
Comments(31)
keepsgettingbanned
says...
10:02am Tue 20 Apr 10
Pleb wrote:Quite right. It's about time that wearing a helmet was made compulsory.
That reminds me -- I need to get a cycling helmet. An ex colleague was killed in Acomb in what would have been a minor collision with a car door if only he had been wearing one.
LittleTed
says...
10:03am Tue 20 Apr 10
keepsgettingbanned wrote:100% agree!
Pleb wrote:Quite right. It's about time that wearing a helmet was made compulsory.
That reminds me -- I need to get a cycling helmet. An ex colleague was killed in Acomb in what would have been a minor collision with a car door if only he had been wearing one.
Jassy
says...
10:33am Tue 20 Apr 10
sheps lad
says...
10:41am Tue 20 Apr 10
LittleTed wrote:Cycle helmets are only designed and tested to withstand an impact equivalent to an average weight rider travelling at a speed of 12 mph falling onto a stationary kerb shaped object from a height of 1 metre. They are not tested or expected to offer full protection if you come into contact with a moving vehicle
keepsgettingbanned wrote:100% agree!
Pleb wrote:Quite right. It's about time that wearing a helmet was made compulsory.
That reminds me -- I need to get a cycling helmet. An ex colleague was killed in Acomb in what would have been a minor collision with a car door if only he had been wearing one.
micky moodys hat
says...
10:46am Tue 20 Apr 10
sheddie
says...
10:52am Tue 20 Apr 10
Posters above - if you're so keen then go ahead and wear helmets when you're on bikes.
Why not also wear them when walking around, or in your car? Makes just as much or more sense in statistical terms.
Just don't presume to tell others what to do.
(This story probabvly isn't the place for yet another cycle helmet debate BTW - surprised comments are open. A man is seriously injured, and uninformed speculation about his headgear isn't all that helpful IMO).
pedalling paul
says...
10:57am Tue 20 Apr 10
By all means purchase the limited protection that it gives. But you will need rto wear a suit of armour, to be truly protected.
keepsgettingbanned
says...
11:01am Tue 20 Apr 10
sheddie wrote:Listen, Mr Imtoojumpeduptoreadi
And so what if he wasn't. Entirely up to him. Plastic hats make little differences when in collision with a ton of car. They can make spinal injuries worse too (extra weight/leverage). Posters above - if you're so keen then go ahead and wear helmets when you're on bikes. Why not also wear them when walking around, or in your car? Makes just as much or more sense in statistical terms. Just don't presume to tell others what to do. (This story probabvly isn't the place for yet another cycle helmet debate BTW - surprised comments are open. A man is seriously injured, and uninformed speculation about his headgear isn't all that helpful IMO).
ntothings, my comment was made as a response to Pleb's first comment. It wasnt a statement in response to the article and nobody has suggested the injured man wasn't wearing a helmet.
I suppose you subscribe to the train of thought that suggests you shouldnt wear a car seat belt for fear of damage to internal organs?
BL2
says...
11:09am Tue 20 Apr 10
sun seeker's
says...
11:26am Tue 20 Apr 10
pedalling paul wrote:I do wear a "suit of armour", it's called a car!
Helmets are as much use as an eggshell in the majority of impacts. They can also give a false sense of invulnerability to both the wearer and other road users. There is increasing evidence that helmeted cyclists are "safe" to overtake faster and closer. By all means purchase the limited protection that it gives. But you will need rto wear a suit of armour, to be truly protected.
sheddie
says...
11:27am Tue 20 Apr 10
Eh? It's a comment right under the article in question. About a man with head injuries.
No objection to people wearing helmets. I do object to anyone trying to inflict them as compulsory for cycling when there is considerable evidence that such a move would do more harm than good.
Re seat belts: no.
nibnob
says...
11:37am Tue 20 Apr 10
voiceofreality
says...
11:43am Tue 20 Apr 10
And then there's the posts talking about a ton car, well how much is the curb weight when tested with a persons head hitting it from a metre at 12mph, i assure you a ton car that is a movable object is a safer bet than hitting your head on a solid piece of the earths crust that won't move under any circumstance.
The point is, as usual there is no real story reporting here apart from a cyclist had an accident with a car. Not a moving car, Not a moving cyclist. it says nothing so nobody knows who's at fault. hope the guy is ok and the car driver.
Stiltzkin
says...
11:50am Tue 20 Apr 10
This is terrible news, it's only just starting to get warm so the main cycling season is just getting started ( lets face it a lot of people only jump on the bike in the good weather) That junction on cemetary road is a nightmare at the best of times, i hope the injuries are not to serious and i hope this is not the first of many news stories of this type of incident happing in York.
MCWM
says...
12:33pm Tue 20 Apr 10
invisibleman
says...
12:36pm Tue 20 Apr 10
Mullarkian
says...
1:39pm Tue 20 Apr 10
On the other hand , why not let people choose for themselves what they wear when travelling, or is that seditious revolutionary talk.
keepsgettingbanned
says...
2:22pm Tue 20 Apr 10
Mullarkian wrote:get over it.
High time that pedestrians were equipped with full face helmets and foam suits in case they fall over. On the other hand , why not let people choose for themselves what they wear when travelling, or is that seditious revolutionary talk.
Saywhat
says...
3:29pm Tue 20 Apr 10
greenmonkey
says...
4:04pm Tue 20 Apr 10
sun seeker's
says...
4:17pm Tue 20 Apr 10
greenmonkey wrote:Cyclist should have lights fitted at night, according to the law!!! But most choose not to.
On a more serious point, 3.30pm is when the road is jammed up with school run traffic - any cyclist using the cycle lane has to be really wary of cars cutting across into Cemetery Rd through the line of standing traffic. The cyclist should have right of way according to the highway code, but not much consolation once you are laid up in a hospital bed.
Mr Udigawa
says...
4:34pm Tue 20 Apr 10
Saywhat wrote:No you don't.
lmao!!! I've stopped reading the news, I just log on to see who's arguing with who!!
pedalling paul
says...
4:40pm Tue 20 Apr 10
Silver
says...
4:57pm Tue 20 Apr 10
Saywhat wrote:It's long lost the actual story this thread hasn't it? I think it diverted from the story from the first post and hasn't headed back hehe. Obviously a lot of people bit angry today and will snap at anyone. Hope the guy gets better
lmao!!! I've stopped reading the news, I just log on to see who's arguing with who!!
Stiltzkin
says...
5:14pm Tue 20 Apr 10
greenmonkey wrote:As a cyclist and a driver this situation is becoming all too frequent.
On a more serious point, 3.30pm is when the road is jammed up with school run traffic - any cyclist using the cycle lane has to be really wary of cars cutting across into Cemetery Rd through the line of standing traffic. The cyclist should have right of way according to the highway code, but not much consolation once you are laid up in a hospital bed.
Drivers seam to forget that cyclists may still be travelling down a road of standstill traffic. This has happened to me on many cross road's and left turns etc. It's about awareness for both the drivers and cyclists.
One thing that does concern me with a large number of the new cycle lanes being put in on various roads in York is that people dont really understand how they work.
Better education on cyclists and for cyclists is needed i believe.
Caecilius
says...
6:08pm Tue 20 Apr 10
MCWM wrote:I've had a couple of near misses at that junction too, one due to someone turning into Cemetery Lane across Fulford Road and the other because of a driver pulling out. Either they didn't see me (and yes, I did have lights, and a bright yellow jacket) or they didn't care. As you say, hope this cyclist makes a quick recovery.
True, I was knocked off my bike at that junction a few years ago by someone who pulled across from Fulford Road into Cemetery Lane and somehow didn’t see me coming. I was very fortunate and was unharmed (if a bit shaken), my bike on the other hand was pretty much a write-off having got crushed under the bumper of the car. I hope the guy gets well soon.
Incidentally, I've never seen any more about the accident, just before Christmas, in which a cyclist was killed by a car on the roundabout at the junction of Eastholme Drive and rawcliffe Lane
coshgirl
says...
11:43am Wed 21 Apr 10
UsernameNotAvailable
says...
10:13am Fri 23 Apr 10
skeifr
says...
4:41pm Fri 23 Apr 10
I suspect the sheer number of cyclists in the Netherlands, and the on- and off-road cycleways available to them may have something to do with the accident rates there. I wonder what the cyclist accident rate was in York back when the Carriageworks and Rowntrees and Terry's disgorged hordes of cyclists onto the roads? I'm still struggling to see any correlation between Australian rates of obesity and compulsory wearing of cycle helmets.
There are a lot of good reasons why wearing cycle helmets in the UK should not be compulsory, one of which is that other road users should not be able to mitigate their liability for their own incompetence by pointing to an unhelmeted or helmeted cyclist. The helmet is irrelevant, it's the determination of liability for the RTA itself that matters.
And I hope the cyclist involved in this case is on the road to full recovery.
◙
says...
4:41pm Sat 24 Apr 10
voiceofreality wrote:When many more children cycled to school, and workers on bikes poured out of numerous factories, there were significantly fewer vehicles on the roads in York, less congestion, and fewer impatient drivers.
omg, what a load of tosh being spoken here! 1 coment is moaning about limited protection of a helmit!, its still protection you mupit, even in it is minimal, wearing no helmit is more dangerous. And the comment about car drivers thinking a person with a helmit on means car drivers overtake faster and closer. do you work for cyc doing stupid surveys that seem completely made up?
And then there's the posts talking about a ton car, well how much is the curb weight when tested with a persons head hitting it from a metre at 12mph, i assure you a ton car that is a movable object is a safer bet than hitting your head on a solid piece of the earths crust that won't move under any circumstance.
The point is, as usual there is no real story reporting here apart from a cyclist had an accident with a car. Not a moving car, Not a moving cyclist. it says nothing so nobody knows who's at fault. hope the guy is ok and the car driver.
I'm not sure if it was statistically safer then; but I personally feel there is more risk now.
The junction where this accident happened is particularly risky; others to watch out for are traffic coming out of Townend St. onto Clarence St; and cars jumping the lights or mistaking the filter arrows at St. Leonards/Bottham/Gil
lygate and Barbican Rd/Lawrence St.
To voiceofreality
11:43am Tue 20 Apr 10
Reality is subjective.
1) An impact with a moving vehicle, unless it is moving away directly from you, incurs greater force (is worse) than an impact with a stationary object, the speed is increased, therefore the force of impact is increased.
2) Tarmac deforms by about 0.7mm when hit by a person's head at 15mph.
Pleb says...
9:57am Tue 20 Apr 10