Headliners 2015

[klipper]

Will knows everyone in real life. This is no joke, he gets around.

will doesn't know me

[Wooderson]

Oasis and the Roses both have 1.6ish decent albums; their debuts and some of their sophmore efforts.

Superbly put. Pints in June.

[Amy Lawn]

The R&L board is largely people reporting Will's movements, 10:34am; spotted Will in a caravan park in Sc**thorpe, looking shifty... and stuff like that.

[Thelips]

Great music is great music, doesn't matter when you heard it or when they recorded it, don't be so tied down to time fella.

Some of the best music happened a feck of a long time ago, Robert Johnson, Beatles, Bob Marley, Stones, Who, Hendrix, Clash, Stone Roses, Nirvana etc etc etc , some happened 5 minutes ago, PABH, Royal Blood, Drenge, Temples etc etc ...... Just get it, love it ...... deal with it.

F T L.

You're missing my point.

It's not a time thing at all. I love that album and I love that era, it was the era I grew up in and probably the era that I still listen to most.

My point is that all the deserved hype they had in the late 80's didn't materialise the way it should have and their carrear was over before it began.

The old bands you list all did the one thing the roses didn't and that was to create an extensive back catogue and leave a long varied body of work.

The Roses can not, in my opinion, be in the 'legend' status on the strength of one outstanding album and one half decent album.

[cokebabies92]

.

Edited April 6, 2015 by cokebabies92

[mufcok]

Probably already been said at some point but wasn't Emily quoted saying she's always been keen on The Stone Roses and sees them as a potential headliner? Think it was a couple of years back

[Slugworth]

So, I took a proper look at The Roses live videos on Youtube there. I thought they were pretty bad. They sound really flat live and the lead singer has an awful voice, I didn't realise quite how bad he was live. Not much energy on stage, just sort of all bunched up in the middle standing around.

Yes, I'm sure it's brilliant in a field packed with hardcore fans for a comeback gig but lets be real, I'd wager the majority of Glastonbury would know Fools Gold, I wanna be Adored, maybe I am the Resurrection. It'll be another Gorillaz.

They were around before I was born so I can't look at them with rose tinted spectacles, maybe I don't 'get' the whole Madchester thing, but from an impartial musical and performance point of view, they seem shit to me.

You are spot on with this. Im not a roses hater btw, i just dont get them headlining after all this time.

[Matt42]

Probably already been said at some point but wasn't Emily quoted saying she's always been keen on The Stone Roses and sees them as a potential headliner? Think it was a couple of years back

Found the article http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/features/glastonbury-organiser-emily-eavis-on-the-return-of-the-sacred-stones-8561544.html

[Untz]

Probably already been said at some point but wasn't Emily quoted saying she's always been keen on The Stone Roses and sees them as a potential headliner? Think it was a couple of years back

She's probably said that about a lot of people. Including other people rumoured for the same slot.

[SteveTLizard]

So, I took a proper look at The Roses live videos on Youtube there. I thought they were pretty bad. They sound really flat live and the lead singer has an awful voice, I didn't realise quite how bad he was live. Not much energy on stage, just sort of all bunched up in the middle standing around.

Yes, I'm sure it's brilliant in a field packed with hardcore fans for a comeback gig but lets be real, I'd wager the majority of Glastonbury would know Fools Gold, I wanna be Adored, maybe I am the Resurrection. It'll be another Gorillaz.

They were around before I was born so I can't look at them with rose tinted spectacles, maybe I don't 'get' the whole Madchester thing, but from an impartial musical and performance point of view, they seem shit to me.

[Bisque]

Woffy remember to tweet me when I'm in Thailand

[Untz]

I agree with him and I don't look half as fetching in fur.

[morph100]

more of nothing still equals nothing........but that means I dont exist.....but I must do.....oh god I have zero mass! its ALL A LIE!

But I can feel it in my bones, and the tea leaf in my tea cup point to a female third headliner so it's gotta be one of those 3. If in wrong I will eat my ouija board.....

Edited April 6, 2015 by morph100

[Bisque]

Typhoo or PG Tips?

[FrancisH]

Probably already been said at some point but wasn't Emily quoted saying she's always been keen on The Stone Roses and sees them as a potential headliner? Think it was a couple of years back

Yeah, certainly interesting that she said that back in 2013, 2014 not being a possibility due to their contract for the run of gigs they did.... and now that's over and big talk of a new album... I dunno, I find it weird how Neil hasn't put them as at least a rumour by now but *shrug* I suppose he has his reasons.

Edited April 6, 2015 by FrancisH

[SteveTLizard]

You're missing my point.

It's not a time thing at all. I love that album and I love that era, it was the era I grew up in and probably the era that I still listen to most.

My point is that all the deserved hype they had in the late 80's didn't materialise the way it should have and their carrear was over before it began.

The old bands you list all did the one thing the roses didn't and that was to create an extensive back catogue and leave a long varied body of work.

The Roses can not, in my opinion, be in the 'legend' status on the strength of one outstanding album and one half decent album.

Yep, looking forward to Lionel

[SteveTLizard]

You're missing my point.

It's not a time thing at all. I love that album and I love that era, it was the era I grew up in and probably the era that I still listen to most.

My point is that all the deserved hype they had in the late 80's didn't materialise the way it should have and their carrear was over before it began.

The old bands you list all did the one thing the roses didn't and that was to create an extensive back catogue and leave a long varied body of work.

The Roses can not, in my opinion, be in the 'legend' status on the strength of one outstanding album and one half decent album.

As I think any like minded person would say ....

do one....

[FloorFiller]

Yeah, certainly interesting that she said that back in 2013, 2014 not being a possibility due to their contract for the run of gigs they did.... and now that's over and big talk of a new album... I dunno, I find it weird how Neil hasn't put them as at least a rumour by now but *shrug* I suppose he has his reasons.

i don't think he has any info to suggest it's them - the only info any of us have had have been from random idiots coming on here and talking nonsense and then the odd person meeting one of the band members and getting a cryptic answer back, whereas he seems to have something for Prince. but what with the huge lack of info on all fronts this year, it really could go either way

[FrancisH]

i don't think he has any info to suggest it's them - the only info any of us have had have been from random idiots coming on here and talking nonsense and then the odd person meeting one of the band members and getting a cryptic answer back, whereas he seems to have something for Prince. but what with the huge lack of info on all fronts this year, it really could go either way

Aye think you're right there, Neil knows something for sure else I reckon they'd be on by now. Also does seem like pretty much all of the Roses stuff seems to come from this forum or unreliable and incredibly bias stone roses fans on twitter...

Edited April 6, 2015 by FrancisH

[Andy0808 v5]

When's that new Roses merch go on sale?

Edited April 6, 2015 by Andy0808 v5

[Woffy]

Superbly put. Pints in June.

Deal. On the Wednesday, I believe.

The mother in law is no longer coming to her first Glasto due to entirely reasonable personal reasons.

I will therefore be getting c***ed at the efests meet rather than being a 'responsible guide'.

[SloopJohnB]

I'm gonna be so f*****g gutted when its announced that Stone Roses aren't headlining

[cornish hick]

There's three of you?!

Support was grand today in fairness, credit where its due.

4

[SteveTLizard]

You're missing my point.

It's not a time thing at all. I love that album and I love that era, it was the era I grew up in and probably the era that I still listen to most.

My point is that all the deserved hype they had in the late 80's didn't materialise the way it should have and their carrear was over before it began.

The old bands you list all did the one thing the roses didn't and that was to create an extensive back catogue and leave a long varied body of work.

The Roses can not, in my opinion, be in the 'legend' status on the strength of one outstanding album and one half decent album.

Quantity over quality then, fair enough ....... I'll see you at the next 1d concert.

[Woffy]

Woffy remember to tweet me when I'm in Thailand

Yes, yes. Calm down Couchy.

As soon as it drops i'll send you a link.

Or does Little Sir have more specific requirements?