DaveP wrote:I saw part of the programme. I suppose you could criticise choice of gear etc, but lots of points seem less critical when there's a full support team coming up behind and keeping the traffic off youur back. I'm no fan of celebrity culture either, but it didnt seem to be a case of fading celebs trying to claw their way back into the limelight. Thankfully (though I'm wondering about Jimmy Carr...). The participants didnt have to do it, and having started they kept on coming out of the comfort of the bus for their next taste of pain. "Seeing it through" is something I can respect no matter who does it
I wonder how much the ride cost to stage? My Dad used to do a lot of fund raising in his time, and he always reckoned that a take of twenty percent over outlay was pretty good going.
I think it's reasonable to ask the question of cost with regard to all of the charity tv activities and I'm sure it's very high, but if the costs are absorbed by the tv company as part of their 'making programme' expense then the charity shouldn't suffer?
I'm not convinced that we should be impressed at the notion of celebs giving their time for free - surely this is the essence of charitable activity and as such does not need to be especially mentioned (they are after all, getting mucho exposure). If us ordinary folk do charitable work we won't charge appearance money for collecting door to door or working at the school fete?
I think some of you need to lighten up. Usually it is me that is accused to being too serious.
Look up on it as an hour of cycling coverage in a prime time slot, repeated and highlighted many times. Many will think about cycling after that programme, if only thinking they can do the same. And that has to be good for cycling.
Next year you may be doing it for the CTC charity.
There is your way. There is my way. But there is no "the way".
At least it didn't put cycling in a poor light which the media tends to do in my experience. Yup the set up was not right, the timing was a bit daft (but that's sport relief for you), but primetime positive coverage does make a change from the usual patronising guff we usually get. What price the publicity stunts and photo opps when the London Cycle Hire scheme gets going? Boris J doing a handstand on one of them in front of Euston station will be the least of it I fear.
And too much criticism of my favourite comedian. Some of our most famous comics seem funny only because they lead the laughter after making their jokes. JC gives you the option. For heaven's sake remember that one man's meat is another man's poison. And all credit to the "celebrities" for sticking it out in terrible conditions on unsuitable bikes.
Hi, I managed to watch this program last night on I player. I thought they did very well and found some of the program interesting. Yes better gears would have made it easier, although it was being tackled from a relay point of view rather than whole days in the saddle. Maybe this was the reason for choice of equipment? Anyway, they raised lots of money and have put cycling in the headlines.
Beakyboy wrote:I watched it, I have no opinion either way on it.
Just felt left out so thought I'd mention that.
Beaky my boy, I'm the man from Cork who discussed this forum with you in Ballydehob recently!
How're things down west. Have you done the Ring of Beara recently?
Things are fine down here thanks, sunny but a tad chilly. Not done the ring yet have a couple of 200K sportives coming up that I may see you on no doubt.
So what if they cycled on "the wrong sort of bike"
Who cares if they cycled in "the wrong sort of weather"
And really, "the wrong sort of clothes"?
Surely this is a good lesson to potential cyclists. "They went out and did it, and hey, they survived. I might give it a go when the weather picks up a bit."
It proves what I thought we'd been campaigning for, that you don't need specialist equipment, just a bike, any bike, and the will to give it a go.
At least that's what I thought we were campaigning for. Unless of course, some cyclists are more equal than others.*
And if you believe that, then quite frankly, I feel more of a kinship with them than you.
They cycled. That's all that matters. That means that even if it was for just a short time, they were one of us.
Gazza
* I love to paraphrase that. Must be the dozy old socialist in me >;o)
We really enjoyed the program and to be honest the only thing that annoyed me was the lead/experienced cyclist pushing both Walliams & Miranda Hart too hard. Their pace had ground to a halt & I thought it was fairly obvious they would fall given how tired they were. The experienced rider should have known this & told them to get off BEFORE they fell. Those who are knocking Jimmy Carr, sorry but if he has bookings to fullfill why should he dissapoint those who are his fans? He did some so what's the beef? I think Miranda Hart deserves a lot of credit as she did virtually no training beforehand due to a previous illness and has asthma, she's not exactly a small girl either. Big raps to all of them as without the 'celebs' this would never have raised as much money with non celebs and would not have been as interesting seeing how they coped with the challenge as would watching 8 'proper cyclists'
Last edited by Tonyf33 on 23 Mar 2010, 2:48pm, edited 1 time in total.
2Tubs wrote:... Unless of course, some cyclists are more equal than others...
Two wheels good, three wheels better?
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way.No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse. There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
I thought it was quite an interesting prog. I think it portrayed cycling in a reasonable light, as well as highlighting some of problems that we face. Whether that will register in the minds of motorists is another matter. One can only hope.
Additionally, I think it showed that cycling is not easy, and requires a good level of fitness. I've read articles in the past that intimated that cycling is easy and therefore not a proper sport like, say, running. The argument in one article seemed to be that because you can ride a bike as a child (and that baby bikes are toys), then it's easy-peasy as an adult. Why that argument didn't also apply to running (i.e. I could run as child, and can as an adult, but running is difficult) is beyond me, but it appeared in a national paper (not that that is any measure of anything, of course).
In terms of the falls, I couldn't tell whether they were using clip-in pedals and were therefore unable to clip out. I know that there were a couple of slips, but the fall on Kirkstone I couldn't make out. Opinions?
