JEREMY Vine has been accused of setting back the cause of cycling with his online clips highlighting bad driving.
put the “fear of God”; into anyone thinking of making the switch from four wheels to two, according to Tour de France commentator .
Keen cyclist , 59, has spent years uploading footage of dangerous drivers he encounters on his commute — but is giving it up to escape trolls.
Ned said his intentions were good, that he was usually right and he was backed by statistics — but that he was harming .
He wrote: “Jeremy is almost always right. What he says, 99 times out of a hundred, is correct.
“He flags up dangerous driving, and explains why it is threatening to a person riding a bike. The statistics, of course, make his case for him.
“But, and, to my mind this is a serious but: just because he’s right, it doesn’t mean that he’s right.
“Respectfully to Jeremy, whose intentions were impeccable, I think he got it wrong. Here’s why.
“Cycling is fun. It is liberating. It is a tremendous, life-changing activity. It puts a smile on your face. Jeremy’s videos, frankly, would put the fear of God into you.”;
He continued: “If you were vaguely considering making the “modal shift”; as active travel geeks refer to ditching the car in favour of a bike (something I have literally done), would Jeremy’s polemical videos persuade you, or put you off? Would they be more or less likely to encourage you?
“My experience of criss-crossing London by bike over the last twenty years is far more benign than Jeremy’s, or at least the edited version of Jeremy’s that he presents online.
“I tend to ride on back routes where I can, have got to know the safer roads, and, by and large, I don’t experience the extreme levels of danger that are presented, so frequently, in Jeremy’s videos.
“That’s not so say it doesn’t happen, but not as often as his presentation suggests.”;
This comes after football thug and agreed to pay him £75,000 after branding him a “bike nonce”;.
BBC Radio 2 hostJeremy had sued ex-Man City, Newcastle and QPR midfielderfor libel and harassment over the slew of vile posts.
The pair had been set for a High Court showdown but Barton revealed he has agreed to pay Vine £75,000 in damages and costs to settle the case.
He also apologised to the broadcaster for the “untrue”; posts, which also included branding Vine a “paedo defender”;.
Barton said: “I have agreed not to make the same allegations again about Mr Vine and I apologise to him for the distress he has suffered.”;
