Spiringsteen

[Wanderlei]

He was absolutely brilliant. The most energetic performance i've ever seen from anyone. Bruce is a God!

[eFestivals]

eFestivals, you're criticising everyone for demanding everyone should like Bruce, yet simultaneously saying that "You know a crap act if you see one" and he's "the blandest act to hit the planet" and "we all know it". What a hypocrite!

Someone near enough said no one didn't like Bruce. Which is patently bollox.

I'm saying I know a crap act when I see it. You might stay and watch acts you think are crap, but I don't.

I'm saying that I think him the blandest act on the planet. And I'm repeating what many others said following Saturday night too. you don't have to agree, you just have to accept my opinion.

Several huge Bruce fans have said his latest album is poor. So those people DO know it. I simply repeated back at them what they'd said.

The hypocrites are those who then deny what they've said. It ain't hypocritical for me to stand behind my opinion. Get over yourself.

Don't care if this is your website, but if you met only one who liked him (which if you actually asked over 100 people is just pure bollocks) it is a bit of a statistical fluke.

Oh look, another living in fantasy world. It happened. It's people's opinions. Get used to it.

I've nowhere claimed those opinions to be typical at that proportion, I've simply stated the proportion I experienced.

While my own little survey is in no way scientific (and I've not mclaimed it was), it does show that many people thought Bruce extremely bland. Live with it.

For the record, I loved him and want to watch his WHOLE set again (any hep would be appreciated) and so did many others. I also met a few who felt slighty dissapointed and some who thought playing 2 1/2 hours was too long (which whilst I don't see how a headliner could play for too long I respect).

ahhhh, so in your opinion, it's OK to be "slightly disappointed", but "hugely disappointed" or even perhaps "bland" has to mean that the person saying such a thing is a liar (see above).

Who was calling another a hyprocrite again? Was it you? Oh dear.

Bruce is a marmite act and you have the right to dislike him as we do the right to love him.

erxcept that, in your mind, if people say it too much they must be a liar. Got you now. Is a person like you the ones that don't get the label "hypocrite"?

However, but saying he didn't put everything into and Neil Young did it is pure wrong. Bruce played until 12.40 am, almost an hour more than Young. Both had their lovers and their haters, just because you own this website doesn't mean you can belittle those who don't agree with you.

I belittle the morons like you that think any negative opinions are lies as you've said above.

Anyhow, based on the first 3 and half minutes of both sets, NY put it all in and Bruce put nowt in. NY wins.

[eFestivals]

So if the Saturday night headliner was so poor and so bland, why does this site's overview of the festival claim that 'this years festival will be hard to beat'?

because while I own this website, I don't - contrary to the moronic opinions from some Bruce fans here - tell people, including those I employ, what they can think or what they can publish.

FFS!!

[strummer77]

I belittle the morons like you that think any negative opinions are lies as you've said above.

Edited June 30, 2009 by strummer77

[gizmoman]

because while I own this website, I don't - contrary to the moronic opinions from some Bruce fans here - tell people, including those I employ, what they can think or what they can publish.

FFS!!

[eFestivals]

Right there, by that simple comment, you are suggesting that Bruce's work is shit/crap/boring/bland/drivel. You are just showing how ignorant you are!

I'm saying that's how I find it. That dopesn't make me ignorant, that just means I have an opinion, just as you have.

Where did I say you made up these opinions? Yet another ignorant comment!

The ignorant one is you. You essentially called me a liar here:-

You have probably spoke to 15-20 people who were undecided about Bruce and the majority of this 15-20 people said he was dire.

To defend your hero, you're resorting to calling me a liar. How very sad.

[Bradders]

As a 19 year old who not only isn't a fan of Springsteen, but really disliked him before the festival after hearing just 2 or 3 songs, I am in the exact demographic that should've hated it. I thought he was great though, if a bit cheesy

[eFestivals]

It was a rhetorical question, it's perfectly clear that you know that Springsteen put on a good show and that your provocative stance in this thread is designed to keep the forum busy as interest starts to wane after the festival, after all, more posts, more visitors, more advertising revenue. Hey! this trolling lark is easy!

I don't know that Springsteen put on a good show. All I know is that he was dire for the 3 and half minutes I saw him, and that the huge majority of randoms I asked also thought him dire. I leave the editorial decisions for this website to the editor.

I've stated my opinion that he was dire. Others have stated their opinions that they thought him great. If I'm trolling then so are you.

Grow up, eh?

[StevieF]

I'm trolling

[eFestivals]

I'm ..... <snip> .... Just someone who did happen go to watch him on Saturday and thought he was very good.

And I'm just someone who did happen to go to watch him on Saturday and thought him dire.

Why do you think you're allowed your opinion, but that I'm not allowed mine?

I apologise for not fitting into either of the clearly defined groups that you think everybody has to be part of.

and I apologise for not fitting into the one clearly defined group that you think everybody has to be part of.

[eFestivals]

Find where I said that. Go on. I said that people can hate him they want and my post was balanced. I never said negative opinions are lies and I admit I heard many saying he was piss poor.

Anyway find out where I say negative opinions are lies. Because you're lying mate.

oh dear .....

Don't care if this is your website, but if you met only one who liked him (which if you actually asked over 100 people is just pure bollocks) it is a bit of a statistical fluke.

I asked around 100 random people for their opinions. Just one thought it was great. No bollox.

Now, that might have been a fluke; I've certainly said it wasn't scientific and nor did I claim it was. But I think it's a good indication that his popularity was far less than you might like to imagine.

[strummer77]

And I'm just someone who did happen to go to watch him on Saturday and thought him dire.

Why do you think you're allowed your opinion, but that I'm not allowed mine?

and I apologise for not fitting into the one clearly defined group that you think everybody has to be part of.

[eFestivals]

Thanks to replying to others, but I'm still waiting for the reply about where I said all neagtice opinions are lies.

To be honest, as owner and admin of this site you shouldn't be misquoting us. You seem to be the moron around here not me.

Did I say specifically say that you'd those exact words? nope. Did I say you were calling me a liar for saying that people had negative opinions? Yep.

The proof is in my post previous to this one (on the previous page), where I quote you essentially calling me a liar.

Now get over yourself, pleeeeaaasssse!

[strummer77]

Did I say specifically say that you'd those exact words? nope. Did I say you were calling me a liar for saying that people had negative opinions? Yep.

The proof is in my post previous to this one (on the previous page), where I quote you essentially calling me a liar.

Now get over yourself, pleeeeaaasssse!

[gizmoman]

I don't know that Springsteen put on a good show. All I know is that he was dire for the 3 and half minutes I saw him, and that the huge majority of randoms I asked also thought him dire. I leave the editorial decisions for this website to the editor.

I've stated my opinion that he was dire. Others have stated their opinions that they thought him great. If I'm trolling then so are you.

Grow up, eh?

[eFestivals]

but going round calling me a moron because I had the audacity to question that 99% of people you spoke to thought Bruce was crap is head-up ass material.

but unless you were there, how would you know if I'd got those results for you to be able to call me a liar as you did?

I got those results. The person who has their head up their arse is the person refusing to accept those results. That's you that is.

Lots of people didn't like Bruce and thought him bland. That's the truth of the matter, whether that's said by me or those people themselves - and you can see from posts other than mine in this very thread that lots of people thought him bland. Get over it.

[eFestivals]

Perhaps you should ask your 'editor' what he thought of the show

I have.

That's for him to say if he wants to .... but I doubt some would like it if he did.

[gizmoman]

I have.

That's for him to say if he wants to .... but I doubt some would like it if he did.

[Zacko]

I thought Springsteen absolutely nailed it and while I did like him a lot before Glastonbury (got a couple albums and listen often) I didn't think he would be as good live as he was.

Being very close to the front (3 rows back) may have made it seem better than it was I dunno.

[Kyelo]

All this debate, the reviews etc etc shows one thing he is extremely marmite, far from 'the best live act in the world'. I have never seen an act recieve such a polarised response, there seems to be actual venom against his performance. That's probably due to die hard fans saying how great he his and many people being left very let down. I myself and a dozen friends watched for half an hour, nearly fell asleep and left but then in the same hand people have similar stories saying he was brilliant.

A lot of people on here are saying things like-;"I have now seen him 5/10/15 times and has been the best act I have ever seen." All that says to me is that they are blatantly massive fans so would think he was 'the best Glastonbury headliner ever'. To people like me who went in to see what all the fuss was about, well a lot of us were disapointed. Like I said the group I was in left after half an hour and had to que to get out, that many were leaving! I heard a lot of people saying it took about and hour or so for the performance to really start, well screw that! lol

Tom Jones had an equally big crowd and it never bloody budged(I know I tried to get through it!), that says it all really. Good on you if you enjoyed it but he is really not as great as his fans make out.

Like people have said he played for his audience, not a festival crowd.

[pedmills]

Right I'm making a poll. It will be slightly better than any of your surveys.

[ml1dch]

And I'm just someone who did happen to go to watch him on Saturday and thought him dire.

Why do you think you're allowed your opinion, but that I'm not allowed mine?

and I apologise for not fitting into the one clearly defined group that you think everybody has to be part of.

[When Jokers Attack]

Anybody who says he is a rubbish performer is a twat, fair enough if people didn't like him but nobody can say he can't perform.

best live music set i have ever seen

roll on hampden

[MikeyB37]

Our group's Glasto virgin/Springsteen worshipper, who bought his ticket on the strength of the Bruce rumours (and has seen 'The Boss' live nearly 30 times over the years) came away distinctly underwhelmed, later rating his performance as less entertaining than The Specials, Doves, Madness, Tom Jones and... the Quo!

[ml1dch]

As a comparison, if Radiohead headline next year as rumoured - if they don't play Creep within the opening few songs (or maybe even don't play it at all) will that mean that they have misjudged the occasion and played a set that appeals only to their fans?