Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Excluding unwanted riders from a group ride

Discussion in 'General Motorcycling Discussion' started by RoderickGI, Dec 16, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mod: This Topic split from https://netrider.net.au/forums/viewtopic.php?t=29744

    Sorry it put a damper on your day Tiga. I still thought it was a great ride, and you did a great job leading it. I was just relieved that we didn't have to pick up pieces. I've only been on two rides so far where someone had an off, ( I don't count Roarin' falling off his KTM, as he was just playing around :grin: ) and the other one was on a well organised Ducati Owners Club ride. The guy was hurt, needed an ambulance, and damaged his lovely ST2. Shame.

    However, I think the guy who came off on the ride you mentioned, and his mate who very nearly did the same thing right in front of me, learned something from the experience. They did slow down, and think about it. Better that they make mistakes with a group of skilled riders who can point out the error of their ways, than on a lone ride at any speed they can reach.

    Not that I ever want to stand around on the side of the road waiting for an ambulance again, with a guy lying on the side of the road in pain. Nor do I want the hassle of organising a bike pickup, the police reports, or whatever, especially for a stranger. But we know that rider training isn't as good as it should be, and new riders do get a lot of value out of group rides. I get satisfaction out of sheparding those that need it on these rides, and I have provided some direct feedback to those that need it. Mind you, I'm still building up my skills after my break from riding, so I can only do so much.

    Maybe if the guy on the Gixxer 1000 had done some group rides with Netrider while on his 250 he would have learned something before his stupidity kicked in. Maybe he would have stayed upright on his 250, and would still have been riding it, so he didn't need to buy another bike. Not that I think Netrider owes anything to idiots like this, but maybe we can affect the outcomes, and therefore the public perception of riders.

    Okay, off the soap box. No criticism intended, quite the opposite. I'm still on track to join you for the Tidal River ride, and I promise to stay on the black top and upright so we can make a great day of it. :cool:
  2. Your not coming accross as harsh at all. I think it's me who's not doing a very good job of making sense. You're right group rides are a great way for inexperienced riders to learn skills. I have learnt heaps over the past couple of years through them. Also it's not just inexperienced riders who can drop their bikes. I know a couple of riders whose riding skills I very much admire who have come to grief on occasion.

    It would be totally unfair to label a learner (or anyone else) as doing something stupid (or being stupid) just because they made an error of judgement. Everyone is allowed to make mistakes.

    My problem comes with riders who are real learners (i.e. don't have dirt or other experience) but who choose to ride 600cc+ bikes, who ride unregistered/unlicenced or drink and ride, etc, etc (you get the picture). I'm not saying don't do this stuff. Everyone needs to make their own decision on these things. I'm just not so cool with people who come along to group rides doing any of the above, because then the consequences of their actions become everyones problem.

    My other experience with a real learner riding a >250cc bike on a group ride (GSXR600) resulted in them running into and pushing over the bike I was pillioning on at the time. No doubt there are a bunch of clever people who learn't from day one on large capacity bikes and never had a problem, so I'm not trying to label everyone as the same. I'd just prefer they have a least a couple of months of "taking it easy" before going on group rides that are mentally more challenging.

    Maybe that's harsh, I'm not sure. I still had a good time on ride I talked about earlier I just had a couple of moments where I questioned if I had done the right thing once it became clear that someone must have come off.
  3. Yes, you did the right thing. Utimately, everyone is responsible for their own actions, and those guys were the ones taking the risk. They had no right to impose the consequences of their risk taking on us, without us being aware or involved in the decision.

    I wouldn't have a problem if a ride leader ask for a license check at the start of a ride, and excluded anyone unable to produce a valid license. Also, if the leader feels someone doesn't have the experience, then they should have the right to exclude them, or limit them in some way. Perhaps putting a buddy on them, to restrict their speed and watch over them. That is part of group riding. Whether they like it or not, a ride leader assumes some responsibility for the group, and should be afforded some authority with it.

    For example, a rider was either advised or decided not to participate in a group ride in Gippsland I attended as they had only had their L's for three days, and the ride was to be on challenging roads. That was a mature and informed decision. On another ride that started in the wet, Carver lead and kept the pace down as we had an inexperienced wet rider with us. No-one complained.

    Ouch on the bike being knocked over. Definitely not acceptable in any circumstances among the riding fraternity.
  4. +1 on the above. The idea of asking to see a valid licence is a damn good one, and would go a hell of a long way to limiting any future (potential) problems if there was an "off".
    In fact, why dont't ride organisers here make it a big RED BOLD footer on the announcements that a licence can / will be asked for and it is a condition of participating in the ride, having one.
    Everyone must carry a licence / permit legally at all times anyway so there should be no excuse.
  5. Ok, not meaning to be argumentative but three things.

    (i) You are correct, legally there is no obligation, I never said there was. AS a general rule only the police and RTA can demand a licence. I said it be made a condition of joining a ride, like when I've hired a Go Kart. Guess what, my ride, my rules. No licence No join. Snag overcome.

    (ii) You are correct, having the licence doesn't mean you can ride. But, if I take an unexperienced rider out and should not have (in other words I could have lessened the danger) I could (maybe) be open to civil action. This is so remote as to be a minor concern, but mentioned for completeness.

    (iii) If a potential ride member has an attitude I probably would request that they don't go anyway. If they are cagey about a reasonable request, properly explained, I don't want them!

    I frankly don't give two proverbials about your feelings. My "duty of care" is to the group as a whole and if I can eliminate "attitude" or illegal riders I will. Oh and in answer to your question. I would rather ride with a legally licenced, competent rider.

    End of argument.
  6. Thanks for answering that thetramp64. My impulse was to immediately provide a less helpful or postive response, and would have become personal, :evil: so I didn't answer at all. :angel:

    Thanks also Ktulu. I was thinking exactly along the lines you did with that phone call. You can't stop them riding on a public road, even following your group, but you don't have to include them, and you could arrange their removal from your tail. :LOL:
  7. +1 for what the tranp, ktulu & RoderickGI said.
  8. In Victoria, that would be incorrect. YourTAC coverage does not depend on the licence or registration status of another rider.
  9. The medical side of things is covered TAC is no fault, true, presuming you are licenced yourself and driving a registered vehicle.

    Insurance wise though, the other (unlicenced / illegal) rider effectively has none. In this case Klutu is correct, it's could well be off to court time.
  10. Tramps, what you said about the licence request at the start of the ride is excellent reading and I'd support it.

    I can't agree with MG's general thrust at all - especially when you consider that any posted ride already has exclusion clauses stated right up front!! e.g experienced ride, learner ride etc. If you're not up to the exclusion and you present to the ride, then not only are you putting yourself in jeopardy, but also the group.

    I'm not sure a licence check is the total answer though, but a fair one. I'd suggest a ride leader also goes for people that they trust vouching for people they don't know and perhaps a clear statement upfront about WHAT will be expected from riders and what the consequences will be if not adhered too.

    Sounds harsh, but leaves NO ONE IN DOUBT!

    I've had the pleasure of being on a few SCUMBAG's rides - who I think has the ride leader thing down pat. At the start of a ride, he rieterates in his SGT SCUMBAGS voice where we're going, the expected conditions and pace, what will be tolerated and what wont. There's no doubt and that makes you feel awfully assured.

    If you don't like the conditons set out for the ride, don't join the group!


  11. This probably wont be popular, but...

    Re: Group ride nazism - where does it end? Do you deny a rider entry because they're riding outside their license conditions (ie a 600 on P's?) Or because they're not wearing gloves? Meh, motorcycles are enough of a minority as it is, without seperating them further. All that'll encourage is unlicensed squids to ride with other unlicensed squids, riding irresponsibly without licenses - which is even worse. Hopefully you can lead by example, sure. Ask for a license like you're some sort of authority, just because you're the leader of a ride? Probably wouldn't go down too well with me.

    Of course I don't have a better answer, and I don't do the whole group ride thing anyway - so probably not all that useful...
  12. You'd have to be a particularly special brand of nitwit pyscho to go along to a ride where you obviously didn't qualify, then after being asked nicely not to join in, skulkingly followed the group at a distance... I think you'd have to do some serious schmoozing not to be completely branded a total tosser!

    +1 Roderick
  13. A bit off topic but why do you presume that a 600 with a P plate is outside their licence conditions? Restrictions to a bigger capacity bike is only for 1 year. Having Ps is for 3 years and must be displayed if they don't have a full licence on their car. So many people jump on riders who have bigger bikes with Ps displayed when they've done nothing wrong...tsk tsk.

    BTW be careful on how you post a ride. If you organise a ride, you could be legally sued if somebody gets hurt even due to their stupidity (eg not wearing right gear, keeping up with somebody etc etc). Bit of a shame when somebody does stupid things and gets kicked off. After I did that, I really didn't feel like posting up much rides. I prefer just to ring up a few mates and go riding with them. Be a d**k and ruin it for others. :? :evil:
  14. Sounds like you just described the loser in Tigas post on page 4.

    And MG I cant be bothered arguing the technicalities, save to say you are not 100% correct. Finally by "excluding" a rider I can circumvent the whole public liabilty and or legal reprocussions correctly mentioned above. Yes mr/mrs/miss loser can follow us, but they will not be part of the ride....
  15. As far as the whole "nazism" comments go and "is it ok to be able to ask someone to leave a ride" etc, I really don't think anyone who hasn't organised a ride is in a position to comment.

    Seriously, take a look at some of the threads in which someone has come off and check out how flamed the ride organiser can get. Everyone seems to be cool with the concept of people being responsible for their own actions UNTIL someone comes off and then the blame games seem to start. "Did the ride organiser properly brief everyone", "were the roads appropriate", "was the ride classification appropriate" blah, blah blah.

    I really don't think you can blame a ride organiser for wanting to take whatever precursions they feel are necessary for a safe ride. I don't plan on doing any sort of licence checks, but I would consider asking someone to leave a ride if they were being silly, particularly if I was led to believe that they wern't properly licenced, registered etc.
  16. Don't tsk me - I may be on a 250, but I'm an unrestricted P plater myself :roll: You knew what I meant.
  17. Personaly, When I lead a ride I couldn't give a fcuk what you ride or wear. It's your decision and as long as you don't fall I don't mind. :) However, if you do fall and fcuk up my day (and everyone elses day) because we have to patch you up, call an ambulance and take your bike home, then you can expect a punch in the head before the abo's arrive. :wink: One persons stupidity is fine as long as no-one else is affected. Everyone's day shouldn't be ruined because one wanker in tracky dacks needed an ambulance when decent pants would have left him with nothing more than a scratched fairing. :)

    I wouldn't ask to see licences. I happily assume everyone is appropriately licenced. I also stipulate no rules on safety gear. I do however prefer people to wear all the gear, if for no other reason than to avoid the punch in the head after they fall. :)

    My only rules are to not overtake on the corners and to ride courteously at all times (the definition of which could take years to type). If a rider is doing something that upsets another, I will happily pull them aside and ask them to adapt their riding accordingly. If the polite request goes ignored, then I'll happily tell them to fcuk off. :) To date, I've never had to do it. :grin: Even better, to date I've never lead or attended a netrider ride that involved someone comming off. :grin: :grin:

    The only thing that matters to me is that everyone gets home safely. Everyone can make their own decisions but if a rider is putting my friends at risk, they have no place in my ride. :wink:
  18. im the same, if youre being a tosser you can fcuk off.

    but i totally dont agree with the concept of "no show licence, no come" im not going to show you my full name, address and date of birth just so i can ride with you. i might do that for someone exceptionally cool like seany, but not most other netriders.

    I never post rides, unless they are cruises around the city (eg chocolate run). If i want to ride in a group i form my own from a complex ranking system created by myself and generated by excel. It incorperates detailed scripts again created by me, like the coolness factor mentioned above, wankerishness, experience and knowledge, usefullness, and most importantly, sexyness/how good their arses look while im chasing them through the hills. (okok i just pick some appropriatly matched people from my phone and call them.)
  19. The BMW Motor Cycle club of Victoria manage to have an exclusive ride system and it works well for them.

    They do sucessfully exclude people from their rides (on public roads) and they can and do require licence checks for new riders they haven't got on their list.

    The way they do it is to have a designated ride leader, and a designated ride tail rider (both wearing fluro marked over gear which shows them as such), and designated corner markers (also with gear).

    They have briefings before hand and you have to attend the briefing. They have ride rules and you have to abide by the ride rules.

    If you don't abide by these rules then your name is taken off the ride list.

    If you aren't on the ride register list then your simply are _not_ on the ride.

    You might be on the same bit of road, but that's not the same thing.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.