Inusuit

Never mind.

Iride01 

Maybe they are worried about lawsuits and trying to limit their liability for suggesting the driver was wrong. In this day and age of on the scene new reporting, they can't risk saying that anyone was at fault until it's proven in court. Unfortunately things like this may not go to court and the news probably wouldn't be interested enough to update anything if it did go to court.

3alarmer 

.
...the reporting at the time strongly implies the driver might have been without fault.

JoeyBike

Yeah, that hits close to home.

Tulane

After his first head coaching job at Dartmouth, Teevens was the coach at Tulane University from 1992 to 1996.[2] While he had an overall record of 11–45 in five years at Tulane, he recruited many of the players on the 1998 team that went 12–0.[2] (WIKI LINK)

A fantastic recruiter.

JoeyBike

Teevens did not have any illuminated lights on his bicycle and wasn’t in a crosswalk or designated crossing area, the report stated. LINK

Iride01 

Yeah, it'd be nice if the OP would post the link to the article they read. Was "inattentive" that was used in their post just something assumed?

njkayaker

Yet another example of somebody complaining about someone saying something but no link to what they actually said.

Provide a link.

And, no, don’t expect people to go looking for whatever you happened to have read.

Inusuit

Sorry for the offense.

njkayaker

You should be.

You aren’t that sorry because you still haven’t provided a link.

Note that it’s pretty much hearsay and begging the question.

Note that the links other people provided don’t use the word “crash” (which you quoted in your post). So, we are left to conclude you are full of it.

Inusuit

https://www.google.com/search?q=dart...hrome&ie=UTF-8

https://www.espn.com/college-footbal...cycle-accident

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...t/70905177007/

https://www.thescore.com/ncaaf/news/271861

https://abcnews.go.com/Sports/dartmo...y?id=103337294

https://www.tidefans.com/forums/thre...-crash.334335/

https://people.com/dartmouth-footbal...-crash-7972071

https://www.mlive.com/sports/2023/09...ike-crash.html

https://www.si.com/college/2023/09/2...crash-injuries

https://www.news-journalonline.com/s...l/70031200007/

njkayaker

Was that so hard?

Of course, you only looked for all of them after the fact (after more than just me called you on it).

Unfortunately, you were also being careless because some of them are actually the same reference!

There's additional sloppiness on your part because many of your refences use the word "crash" in the headline (which have all sorts of issues you should be aware of).

The last reference doesn't use the word crash in reference to the particular incident.

So, you just did a slapdash google search (after the fact) and got references you did not even read!



You are also making a very broad claim here. All the references you found (after the fact!) fail to support this broad claim.

I-Like-To-Bike

Even worse, at least according to some BF would-be semantic scholars, the USA Today reference uses the term "Bike Accident" to describe the incident that led to the fatal injuries.

spclark 

So a coach, who revolutionized reducing injuries in college football, somehow failed to see potential benefit in some basic protocols for safe biking? And at night too?

I had to dig back to find a report from not long after his 'accident' to find some relevant details: No helmet, no lights, failed to yield.

Bike vs. F-150, not an even match.

Hardly an accident IMHO.

Like with the guy I hit on my way to work in Chicago in 2005.

Headed east into the rising sun on Chicago Avenue, I was following behind a van in the right lane when it suddenly stopped mid-block. I assumed it was dropping someone off so I pulled into the inner lane to pass. Only to find a cyclist facing me in that lane, beside the van, whom I struck at ~ 20 mph.

I was driving a MINI Cooper, wasn't cited.

It was 7 AM, cyclist had been headed westbound but decided instead to attempt to cross four lanes of city street, against two lanes of oncoming traffic.

Van driver didn't stick around..​

​​​​​​Cyclist ended up in hospital.

My insurance settled his PI claim for significant $$$ a year later despite word that lab test when hospitalized showed he had a BAC of 0.20 soon after being admitted.

I don't look back at the heart attack I experienced six months later as an 'accident' either.

indyfabz

Jeebus!

Some 20 years ago I found out that a former GF and very good friend that I had lost touch with had been hit by a truck and killed while riding home from her new position at Kent State. I ended up trading emails with her department head and expressed general anger and motorists. He told me it was her fault. That she was "not being careful enough." That's why I get somewhat peeved when people in this forum seem to automatically assume fault on the part of the motorist. People who do that should think twice after reading about your experience, because something like that could happen to them. I live in a large city with many narrow, one-way streets. People routinely ride against traffic. I have lost count of how many wrong-way cyclists I have almost hit while making right had turns at intersections.

Iride01 

Off topic, but I see this too. And I wonder when I watch parents walking in the neighborhood with their young children riding bikes on the same side as the parents are walking, if they are just getting their kids use to riding their bikes on the wrong side of the road.

I also wonder if it's time to do away with walking into traffic. Seems many that aren't pedestrians think they are and they too ride into traffic. Regardless, it just gets to be a mess when cars, bicycles, walkers, runners and roller skaters come to the same point going different directions in both lanes. I'd be happier walking with the traffic whether motorized or not.

spclark 

Pedestrian... interesting etymology in that word. English is so grand a language what with many words having such disparate meanings depending on context.

You left out skateboarders, unicylers.

I maintain that if one's feet are involved – whether in contact with the ground / pavement or providing the means of propulsion to carry you along – you by definition are a pedestrian.

If instead there's another means of propulsion one benefits from, one is supposed to be in control of that 'vehicle' at all times and thus responsible for its effects on surroundings.

A helmsman in a sailboat's got his sails and tiller, a motorcycle rider's got his throttle and brakes. Walkers, bicyclists, rollerskaters and skateboarders all use their feet for propulsion after all, right? Why then are bicyclists legally viewed as vehicles?

There've been MUPS I've ridden that prohibit motor vehicles for the safety of folks like yourself I trust. Bicyclists are universally welcomed as long as they behave themselves.

Iride01 

What dictionary are you using?

Mine specifically says a person walking. My feet are involved when I drive a motor vehicle. So I guess I'm a pedestrian when I am the driver according to your qualification of the use.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Pede...hrome&ie=UTF-8

10 Wheels

pic
Dartmouth Football Coach Dies After Cycling Accident - Men's Journal | Cycling on Men's Journal (mensjournal.com)

njkayaker

???

Whatever you happen to "maintain" is irrelevant. Basically no one is going to agree with that odd definition. That is, you have to conform with the definition other people use. Not your own peculiar private one.

"Pedestrian" is a synonym for "walker" (and often is broadened to include "runner"). It's not that hard.

Well, there are pedal boats and boats with foot-operated rudders too. Which, by your "definition", means these users walk on water (and, hence, become Jesus too).

Bicyclists (human beings) are never "viewed as vehicles" (legally or otherwise).

Some states define bicycles as vehicles and some don't (I'd estimate it it as about half-and-half). Bicycles being or not being vehicles isn't that meaningful anyway. It's mostly an artifact of how the state traffic laws are written.

You should know that bicyclists are treated as drivers of vehicles (in every state) because, basically, they can travel much faster than pedestrians and it allows them to use the roadways like drivers of vehicles do.