Shane warne hates cyclists!!!

thecat said:
What does it matter to you if a cyclist runs a red light or cut's up over a footpath? Seriously how does it effect you personally as you sit in your car fuming?
Click to expand...

I think its the trauma of what could happen. That cyclist could be the one you end up killing one day because he or she ran a red light. Or it could be your friend who thought it would be okay to run that red light and got killed.

If someone gets killed, it affects everybody no matter who's fault it is.
 
stackcheddar said:
I think its the trauma of what could happen. That cyclist could be the one you end up killing one day because he or she ran a red light. Or it could be your friend who thought it would be okay to run that red light and got killed.

If someone gets killed, it affects everybody no matter who's fault it is.
Click to expand...

I liked your VTEC pic.

You're a good bloke, because you don't want to see someone get hurt. You are the 99%.

The other 1% are actually trying to hit the cyclists, to try to stop them getting ahead.

As for consciousness, we all need to be conscious of the rules as well (filtering, etc), not just where the bike, cyclist, truck is, and to a lesser extent, if we are getting in someone's way or pissing someone off. Tho the last one, old mate would have benefited if he had known Warnie was about to play him some potential Mercedes chin music.
 
stackcheddar said:
I think its the trauma of what could happen. That cyclist could be the one you end up killing one day because he or she ran a red light. Or it could be your friend who thought it would be okay to run that red light and got killed.

If someone gets killed, it affects everybody no matter who's fault it is.
Click to expand...

Why does everyone have to live by your accepted risk vs gain standards?. People aren't stupid, although they do do stupid things now and then, they know what "could" happen.

Stop worrying about what "could" happen, wake up and live with what "will" happen.
 
riderseventy7 said:
Why does everyone have to live by your accepted risk vs gain standards?. People aren't stupid, although they do do stupid things now and then, they know what "could" happen.

Stop worrying about what "could" happen, wake up and live with what "will" happen.
Click to expand...

Is that a seasonal excuse for stupidity? Why doesn't Darwin's Theory of Evolution work? Why?

If I know it's stupid, I don't... simply I DON'T

Whether it's me involved or I see someone doing it at home, work or play.

Stupid stunts your excuse? Let me bring your knowledge a little higher (who knows, you might live to age of retirement).
How about controlled risk? How far is that from "People aren't stupid, although they do stupid things now and then, they know what "could" happen."

I'm outta here. I the level of crap in this thread is beyond my tolerance. I'll stick back to back flips and double flairs... in a controlled risk fashion.
 
Dozer said:
Do you feel stupid for saying that? You should because it is total crap. I ride a bike on the road daily and I don't go close to having any accidents or causing any problems for anyone or anything. I make decisions on when to cross a road or take a turn in a safe manner that is within the rules but when you see groups of riders and single riders totally doing the wrong thing and pissing people off by doing so you get the impression that those people think they are above others and then they bitch and moan when they get in a situation where a vehicle has a scratch and they have a trashed bike and are spamming the internet with complaints from a hospital bed! Let me assure you that most of the riders in my area that do their group rides and triathlon routes around town for practice are breaking laws and endangering everyone around them. Why shouldn't I assume they are all mongs and just asking for trouble?
Does having an expensive car instantly make you a roadie hater? Why would you get annoyed being passed by someone on a bike while you're stationary or moving slowly?
Click to expand...

Yes indeed,
You clearly don't get what I was talking about. "I saw some bad cyclists once so all cyclist are bad" is fairly stupid. I too cycle regularly and the majority of riders I see are observant, respectful and obey the law which is more than I can say for some of the driving I have seen in this country.
You should assume they are all mongs and this is what should lead you to give them a wide berth and pay attention to what they are doing. The majority are good but there will always be a few wankers.

So if you perceive that they are asking for trouble does that mean that you are within your rights to give it to them? If you are in your car getting pissed off because some one is riding in a manner which annoys you ( yet is usually perfectly legal) and you do something like speed around them then you are the wanker. They may be annoying you and he'll even breaking the law but it is your actions which will decide whether they are killed or not. It happened to me while driving a few days ago down Brunswick street. A guy was pedalling along quite happily in the middle of the lane. It fucked me off but I have better sense than to try to fly past him because I know that if I hit him he is fucked and I'll go to prison.

There is basically no circumstance short of deliberately pulling across moving traffic where I can see a cyclist being seriously hurt without a driver doing something stupid, reckless, illegal or negligent.

Sure you see dicks riding with music on or no helmet but they are fairly rare.
 
shane warne is a flipper for sure. rego for bikes? pah. your weekend will be like this: hey gav, coming for a ride? nah man no rego on the old girl. or didn't pass a "roady" . so i guess the cut of age will be 16, they couldnt possibly try to charge families for there kids riding to school an back. i for one will not be paying sh#t to the goverment to ride my push bike. shane warne an people like him can suck a fat one:biggrin:
 
SuperSix said:
If I know it's stupid, I don't... simply I DON'T
Click to expand...

And there's nothing wrong with that at all. However consider that something may be stupid, but not dangerous. Also something could be dangerous, but not stupid. There are lines drawn all over the place and it is up to the individual to calculate the risks they are willing to take.

SuperSix said:
Let me bring your knowledge a little higher
Click to expand...

Please, do enlighten me.

SuperSix said:
(who knows, you might live to age of retirement).
Click to expand...

Oh, don't worry about it. If that cliche is all your intelligence can muster I shall pass.


SuperSix said:
Stupid stunts your excuse?
How about controlled risk? How far is that from "People aren't stupid, although they do stupid things now and then, they know what "could" happen."
Click to expand...

What the fuck are you trying to say there? I've read through this part of your post a number of times and the correct spelling is all that makes sense. Your mish mash of grammar has rendered your point indecipherable, although I do have a fair idea of where you're coming from.

Anyway, in amongst it you manage to string some words together that form the following, controlled risk. That just proves my point that people aren't stupid. They are controlling the risks down to a manageable level that is acceptable to them.


SuperSix said:
Why doesn't Darwin's Theory of Evolution work? Why?
Click to expand...

Because there is so little risk to human beings these days that people find it very, very, very easy to survive.
The theory still works. It's just that the goal posts have been moved in regards to what is determined as the fittest in humans these days.
 
Last edited:
Some of his points are pretty good. He just went a bit far at the end.

Generalisations often spread from some sort of truth, and unfortunately a minority of cyclists give the rest of us a bad reputation.
 
riderseventy7 said:
Why does everyone have to live by your accepted risk vs gain standards?
Click to expand...

They're not my standards. If running a red is law, it's a law passed by the government which represents the people on average - some may think its too harsh, some might think it should be tougher but on average people think its too dangerous to be running red lights. Thankfully we don't live in a fascist state - if many people disagreed the fact that a certain action is an acceptable risk, they would campaign to have the law changed.

riderseventy7 said:
And there's nothing wrong with that at all. However consider that something may be stupid, but not dangerous. Also something could be dangerous, but not stupid. There are lines drawn all over the place and it is up to the individual to calculate the risks they are willing to take.
Click to expand...

I agree.

But a risky act by a person can cause other people trauma. Sure you might be a person who is willing to take on more risk but the world is bigger than just you. People around you are affected by your actions. Laws aren't just there to keep you safe (or kill your fun), one of the reasons why they exist is to stop you from causing other people distress whether you intended to or not.*


So yes, you can take risks all you like, just don't let it affect me or the people I care about - if you're unsure, just abide by the law. Thanks.
 
Saw him on TV the other night at the cricket running towards a cameraman on the boundary. Warne needs to get a warranty from his plastic surgeon that the results will last. He was looking very old!!!!! Either that or he is buying his make up from a $2 shop!
 
SuperSix said:
Is that a seasonal excuse for stupidity? Why doesn't Darwin's Theory of Evolution work? Why?

If I know it's stupid, I don't... simply I DON'T

Whether it's me involved or I see someone doing it at home, work or play.

Stupid stunts your excuse? Let me bring your knowledge a little higher (who knows, you might live to age of retirement).
How about controlled risk? How far is that from "People aren't stupid, although they do stupid things now and then, they know what "could" happen."

I'm outta here. I the level of crap in this thread is beyond my tolerance. I'll stick back to back flips and double flairs... in a controlled risk fashion.
Click to expand...

+1 Poor or no concept of risk management is a well documented defining feature of an increasing number of the younger generations (its been going on for a while) and why they are becoming increasingly over represented in tragic statistics.

And I say that as an observation, not as a criticism. Mind that is not to say there werent similarly minded individuals in my day, but not the same significant proportion.
 
redbruce said:
+1 Poor or no concept of risk management is a well documented defining feature of an increasing number of the younger generations (its been going on for a while) and why they are becoming increasingly over represented in tragic statistics.

And I say that as an observation, not as a criticism. Mind that is not to say there weren't similarly minded individuals in my day, but not the same significant proportion.
Click to expand...

Male workers over 55 have a higher incidence rate than 15-25's. Young people are vulnerable as the frontal lobe in the male (which helps with risk assessment) may not fully develop till mid 20's. What happens later in life must be true complacency, a choice which costs the community more than the victim of inevitable Darwinism.

RE the OP: So many people carry on about what occurred, when it's just media making a shit fight out of pretty much nothing. Plastic man in fancy car get pissed off that some cyclist does something that probably would piss allot of people off. Well it's unlikely to be something I would do, so as much as Warne is apparently (like all we tend to know is how the media reports on somebody) a dickhead, I would have likely been annoyed too. Just cause I ride about in the bush and on a few roads does not mean every cyclist is a freaking angel.
 
It's back on!!!

Get the gloves out, pick yer sides, and get ready for a media circus. On the radio this morning cyclist has decided to sue Shane Warne for damages - $1500 bucks. Obviously a lot more to it than the cash. I'd guess that the bloke has decided enough is enough and it's time to put the yob in his place. If eye witness reports are anything to go by, Warnie will be choking on his words. I hope that this makes it to court so we can all see the truth exposed.

On a secondary note, if the cyclist wins, and eye witness accounts contribute to enough evidence, would that warrant criminal charges against Warne?
 
F*cking tool.

If I see you on the road Warnie, your'e getting a cleat to your side mirror*.

* harmonix wouldn't actually do this. He is just having a net-vent, and doing so makes him feel like a big man.
 
Last edited:
The thing that shits me is Warnie always has that smug look anytime you see him ... like he is thinking any one is so beneath him they should feel pleased to be in the presence of a true god......

And he had that look before the surgery ..... I wonder where his belly button is now everything has been lifted so high? mmmmmm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top