Wednesday comes but once a week.

Further to yesterday's post, in which I discussed sportswriter Bob Ryan's dumbfuckulous tweet, at least two readers have since reached out to the old fusspot and received responses.  Here's what he said to Ray:

Rather obvious. Whatever the benefits of cycling may be, getting killed or maimed on one of our streets or highways is not worth it. This country is not set up to accommodate cyclists safely. This is
news?

This is a great point, because nobody is ever killed or maimed while driving, and of course our country accommodates cars spectacularly well, which is why drivers never get stuck in traffic jams or have difficulty parking.

And here's his reply to Esteemed Commenter and Boston Area Correspondent Daddo One:

Oh, gee. Just living in America and seeing the impracticality of bicycles on our streets and highways isn't enough of a qualification? As I said, great abstract concept. Totally impractical. I favor life, not fatalities and maimings. Bikes don't belong on the streets. This is rather obvious.

He further added:

13 people KILLED on Boston streets in the last 5 years. Next question.

Obviously the natural follow-up question would be "Are you really this fucking stupid?," but instead Daddo One humored him by pointing out that, according to the CDC, "motor vehicle crashes (MVCs) remain a leading cause of injury death in the United States and represent the leading cause of death among teens and young adults nationally."  Therefore, it would naturally follow that Bob Ryan believes cars don't belong on our streets as well.

As far as I know Ryan has not replied to this, because he's too busy dipping his droopy, desiccated testicles in his morning oatmeal.  In fact, he hasn't tweeted in two days, which could indicate that Monday's bowl of oatmeal dried around his balls and he's been busy trying to chip them out with a spoon ever since:

Interestingly, it's also worth noting that while Bob Ryan will say incendiary things about cyclists, he's surprisingly diplomatic when it comes to the dog vs. cat debate:

Don't think it's wise to engage in a dog vs cat debate. To each his (or her) own.

— Bob Ryan (@GlobeBobRyan) July 21, 2015

So the guy will say that bicycles don't belong on public roadways, yet he doesn't have the oatmeal-covered balls to say that dogs can go fuck themselves?

What a putz.

Can you imagine this hoary doofus shuffling up to his desk, booting up his ancient computer, and pecking out moronic tweets about bikes and pets?

I mean sure, I tweet about the same things, but I'm considerably more nimble and I do it from the toilet.

Given all this, I can't help wondering what conclusions Bob Ryan would draw from this:

Two women were seriously injured on a Second Avenue sidewalk yesterday afternoon when a motorist jumped the curb and collided with them. Police say a 24-year-old woman was transported to Bellevue Hospital in critical condition with severe leg injuries, while a 23-year-old woman was listed in stable condition with leg injuries. The 24-year-old was reportedly pinned against a light pole.

Obviously people shouldn't be allowed to walk outside.

By the way, here's the New York Post version of that incident:

The accident happened as the woman was walking along Second Avenue near East 49th Street around 4:30 p.m. Monday when a silver Mercedes traveling south on Second was cut off by another car and went up onto the sidewalk, witnesses said.

Yep, just an "accident"--which the police know because they haven't finished investigating yet:

Police said they are still investigating the incident.

I realize all of this is confusing, so here's your New York Post vocabulary cheat sheet:

"Accident": When a reckless driver kills somebody as a direct consequence of their actions
"Was walking": Probably on her cellphone, she had it coming
"Still investigating the incident": Having lunch

It should all make sense now.

Speaking of "accidents," of course by now you've seen that spectacular Tour of Utah crash:

Just watching it was enough to make me soil my magical Mormon underwear.

As you can see, he comes screaming into the inside of the turn at an extremely high "rate of speed" (as the police like to say), braking so hard that his rear wheel loses traction:

Then presumably he eased up on the rear brake, sending him into a bit of a nose wheelie:

And finally the emergency brake kicked in, in the form of this car:

Ouch.

So would this situation have resolved itself differently had the rider's bike been equipped with cutting-edge hydrolic dick breaks?  Well, no.  Even with his primitive rim brakes he clearly had enough braking power to lock up his wheels, despite the fact that he was traveling well in excess of "Fred Woo-hoo-hoo-hoo!" speed.  Still, rode bieks with dick breaks are coming whether you like it or not, especially now that the pros are officially using them:

While it makes sense that Campy-sponsored teams would not test disc brakes, it isn't just a matter of component availability. Bike selection also plays into the equation. While most if not all of the WorldTour teams' bike sponsors have disc bikes, the vast majority of these are endurance bikes, with notably different geometry than the race machines most of the riders use everyday. Specialized's Tarmac Disc bike has identical geometry to its standard Tarmac race bike. However this machine uses a proprietary rear hub spacing, so riders could not take a neutral support wheel unless it was a Specialized Roval.

Give it a few more years of manufacturer tug-of-war before they settle on a "standard," and then that will be the end of rim brakes.  Yes, today's road rim will be tomorrow's combination keychain/bottle opener:

Then as soon as you get used to dick breaks yours will be totally obsolete as soon as they introduce road bike ABS.

And so it goes.

Lastly, here's something to be concerned about:

Absolutely no good can come of a contraption like that.