At least this article suggests that Mick and Keith says "Had it with you" and are worried about any plans of the Stones, come whatever, new album or new tour.
Seems to me that Ronnie's in a bad position right now.

Hopefully for Ronnie and especially the Rolling Stones things get sorted out to all parties best. My personal feeling is that they will eventually sack Ronnie and get a new guitarist. As always they will find one that suits in the band.

I have to comment on these 2 qoutes
"ronnie is a stone, more so than taylor ever was, although taylor had his moments in the studio, live i don´t like his sound."

In my humble opinion, sadly enough Ronnie's not a Rolling Stone anymore, he's an very unhealthy person that won't be ready for a new tour in the near future.
Mick Taylor was (if not anymore) the best guitarist after Brian Jones, they could choose at that time. MT was a young lad and didn't fit in to the Stones way of life at that time. Though everyone has grown older and hopefully matured. So MT could be the choice once again. I know MT has health issues too like Ronnie but not as severe as RW's. Might be fixed by any good specialist! One need only to listen to "GET YER YA - YA's OUT" or "The Brussel's Affair" to understand that MT was sounding very good live too.

"woody will be there on tour 2010, i truly believe this, mick will have his pre tour talk with him and he will be on the tour"

I personally don't think he will be there in 2010, Mick won't put up with this anymore, he's too much of a business man these days and also a grown up man having his moments of rock and roll, when he's hitting the stage. Same with Keith!
And now I know some of you will bash me for advocating Keith's drinking problems on the latest tour. This time around though Keith now have the insight that there cannot be 2 drunk guitarists on stage. Because that would mean the end of the Stones. Keith's be looking healthy and happy. Just check out the vid's from the Scream presentation.

I think changes are on the way wether we like them or not!

Been Stoned since 1964 and still am!

Quote
Gazza

Quote
atip
Hey, it's a known fact that Ronnie's a big-time drunk. Drunks are usually not very predictable nor responsible. If she still hooked up with him, then she's partly to blame. Yes, she's young and probably naive, so couldn't see past that a famous musician wanted her. Lastly, occasionally, and ONLY very rarely, knocking a woman around could be justified. I don't know if that's the case w/ this little tart.

Damn, I wish he'd get his act together. He's a talented guy.

Please feel free to fill us all in as to when its 'justified'....

Spot on Gazza as usual!

Quote
71Tele
Hard to know what really goes on within the dynamic of the group. I would be surprised if Woody's relationship with the band is as bad as is indicated here. Maybe the affection between him and Keith is a facade at this point. But it seems if they were going to fire him they would have done so by now. My guess is they are playing for time, hoping he will somehow straighten himself out and that the latest "incident" will blow over by the time they need to do anything public as a group, reckoning that that's easier than getting a new guitarist at this point in their career. But I do emphasize that I am guessing. I have no idea.

Yep, that's about it I reckon. I DO think that at the moment they're playing for time, but on the subject of Woody's relationship with the rest of the band ... I think it probably IS as bad as the article suggests. Maybe time will heal ? Hope so, for all our sakes.

If Ron gets sacked, it's not because they want to, but because they have to... If he fails his medical test, they're left with no other choice but to replace him. It's all up to Ronnie now. I don't know if he can make it, but I do know he needs the money, and he's the only Stone for whom money is the real motivation. The others are so wealthy, no matter what they do, they'll not be able to spend everything during their lifetime.

The chemistry between Ronnie and Keith is not the problem. This band's existed despite bad chemistry between at least two members for decades, so that's not the problem at all.

Replacing Ronnie with Mick Taylor? Now, how many cancellations would that lead to. Does anyone seriously believe he'd pass the medical? And replacing one problem with an even bigger one is nothing a corporation, that's what the Stones is, would even consider. Beck, Lofgren, - could be. (But Gazza would be very disappointed if it interferes with Springsteen's plans...)

For the people that put any stock into a daily mail article please go to the following link,

[dictionary.reference.com]

Sadly enough that some people here don´t care about
Ronnie, they are just discussing the replacement. @#$%&!

And funny enough that businessman Mick doesn´t want to go on
with an alcoholic/misogynic musician. Well, at least I thought
both were and are characteristics of their lyrics and behaviour.

I strongly hope that this tabloid bullshit is false and that
Jagger gets it together with Ronnie. And - doesn´t Keith
have to do something? At least he is Ronnie´s "brother",
as he often told us.

I swear - I won´t go if there will be any other hired @#$%&
to replace him.

If they´d replace Ronnie with Wachtel or Chaplin or Beck
or Lofgren - I would HATE Mick for doing that. Seriously.

Quote
TooTough
If they´d replace Ronnie with Wachtel or Chaplin or Beck
or Lofgren - I would HATE Mick for doing that. Seriously.

me too
Mick Taylor, to me, is the only acceptable option apart from the fact that it is not likely either. I just hope that Ronnie can get his shite together although that I have my doubts.

Look what the poor bastard is up against. Christ Ronnie, get some HELP !!


Facts About Alcoholism

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


For many people, the facts about alcoholism are not clear. What is alcoholism, exactly? How does it differ from alcohol abuse? When should a person seek help for a problem related to his or her drinking? The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) has prepared this booklet to help individuals and families answer these and other common questions about alcohol problems. The information below will explain alcoholism and alcohol abuse, symptoms of each, when and where to seek help, treatment choices, and additional helpful resources.

A Widespread Problem

For most people, alcohol is a pleasant accompaniment to social activities. Moderate alcohol use--up to two drinks per day for men and one drink per day for women and older people (A standard drink is one 12-ounce bottle of beer or wine cooler, one 5-ounce glass of wine, or 1.5 ounces of 80-proof distilled spirits) -- is not harmful for most adults. Nonetheless, a substantial number of people have serious trouble with their drinking. Currently, nearly 14 million Americans--1 in every 13 adults--abuse alcohol or are alcoholic. Several million more adults engage in risky drinking patterns that could lead to alcohol problems. In addition, approximately 53 percent of men and women in the United States report that one or more of their close relatives have a drinking problem.

The consequences of alcohol misuse are serious--in many cases, life-threatening. Heavy drinking can increase the risk for certain cancers, especially those of the liver, esophagus, throat, and larynx (voice box). It can also cause liver cirrhosis, immune system problems, brain damage, and harm to the fetus during pregnancy. In addition, drinking increases the risk of death from automobile crashes, recreational accidents, and on-the-job accidents and also increases the likelihood of homicide and suicide. In purely economic terms, alcohol-use problems cost society approximately $100 billion per year. In human terms, the costs are incalculable.

What Is Alcoholism?

Alcoholism, which is also known as "alcohol dependence syndrome," is a disease that is characterized by the following elements:

Craving: A strong need, or compulsion, to drink.
Loss of control: The frequent inability to stop drinking once a person has begun.
Physical dependence: The occurrence of withdrawal symptoms, such as nausea, sweating, shakiness, and anxiety, when alcohol use is stopped after a period of heavy drinking. These symptoms are usually relieved by drinking alcohol or by taking another sedative drug.
Tolerance: The need for increasing amounts of alcohol in order to get "high."

Alcoholism has little to do with what kind of alcohol one drinks, how long one has been drinking, or even exactly how much alcohol one consumes. But it has a great deal to do with a person's uncontrollable need for alcohol. This description of alcoholism helps us understand why most alcoholics can't just "use a little willpower" to stop drinking. He or she is frequently in the grip of a powerful craving for alcohol, a need that can feel as strong as the need for food or water. While some people are able to recover without help, the majority of alcoholic individuals need outside assistance to recover from their disease. With support and treatment, many individuals are able to stop drinking and rebuild their lives.

Many people wonder: Why can some individuals use alcohol without problems, while others are utterly unable to control their drinking? Recent research supported by NIAAA has demonstrated that for many people, a vulnerability to alcoholism is inherited. Yet it is important to recognize that aspects of a person's environment, such as peer influences and the availability of alcohol, also are significant influences. Both inherited and environmental influences are called "risk factors." But risk is not destiny. Just because alcoholism tends to run in families doesn't mean that a child of an alcoholic parent will automatically develop alcoholism.

What Is Alcohol Abuse?

Alcohol abuse differs from alcoholism in that it does not include an extremely strong craving for alcohol, loss of control, or physical dependence. In addition, alcohol abuse is less likely than alcoholism to include tolerance (the need for increasing amounts of alcohol to get "high"). Alcohol abuse is defined as a pattern of drinking that is accompanied by one or more of the following situations within a 12-month period:


Failure to fulfill major work, school, or home responsibilities;
Drinking in situations that are physically dangerous, such as while driving a car or operating machinery;
Recurring alcohol-related legal problems, such as being arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or for physically hurting someone while drunk;
Continued drinking despite having ongoing relationship problems that are caused or worsened by the effects of alcohol.

While alcohol abuse is basically different from alcoholism, it is important to note that many effects of alcohol abuse are also experienced by alcoholics.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


What Are the Signs of a Problem?

How can you tell whether you, or someone close to you, may have a drinking problem? Answering the following four questions can help you find out. (To help remember these questions, note that the first letter of a key word in each of the four questions spells "CAGE.")


Have you ever felt you should Cut down on your drinking?
Have people Annoyed you by criticizing your drinking?
Have you ever felt bad or Guilty about your drinking?
Have you ever had a drink first thing in the morning to steady your nerves or to get rid of a hangover (Eye opener)?

One "yes" response suggests a possible alcohol problem. If you responded "yes" to more than one question, it is highly likely that a problem exists. In either case, it is important that you see your doctor or other health care provider right away to discuss your responses to these questions. He or she can help you determine whether you have a drinking problem and, if so, recommend the best course of action for you.

Even if you answered "no" to all of the above questions, if you are encountering drinking-related problems with your job, relationships, health, or with the law, you should still seek professional help. The effects of alcohol abuse can be extremely serious--even fatal--both to you and to others.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Decision To Get Help

Acknowledging that help is needed for an alcohol problem may not be easy. But keep in mind that the sooner a person gets help, the better are his or her chances for a successful recovery.

Any reluctance you may feel about discussing your drinking with your health care professional may stem from common misconceptions about alcoholism and alcoholic people. In our society, the myth prevails that an alcohol problem is somehow a sign of moral weakness. As a result, you may feel that to seek help is to admit some type of shameful defect in yourself. In fact, however, alcoholism is a disease that is no more a sign of weakness than is asthma or diabetes. Moreover, taking steps to identify a possible drinking problem has an enormous payoff--a chance for a healthier, more rewarding life.

When you visit your health care provider, he or she will ask you a number of questions about your alcohol use to determine whether you are experiencing problems related to your drinking. Try to answer these questions as fully and honestly as you can. You also will be given a physical examination. If your health care professional concludes that you may be dependent on alcohol, he or she may recommend that you see a specalist in diagnosing and treating alcoholism. You should be involved in making referral decisions and have all treatment choices explained to you.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Getting Well

Alcoholism Treatment


The nature of treatment depends on the severity of an individual's alcoholism and the resources that are available in his or her community. Treatment may include detoxification (the process of safely getting alcohol out of one's system); taking doctor-prescribed medications, such as disulfiram (Antabuse®) or naltrexone (ReViaTM), to help prevent a return to drinking once drinking has stopped; and individual and/or group counseling. There are promising types of counseling that teach recovering alcoholics to identify situations and feelings that trigger the urge to drink and to find new ways to cope that do not include alcohol use. Any of these treatments may be provided in a hospital or residential treatment setting or on an outpatient basis.

Because the involvement of family members is important to the recovery process, many programs also offer brief marital counseling and family therapy as part of the treatment process. Some programs also link up individuals with vital community resources, such as legal assistance, job training, child care, and parenting classes.

Alcoholics Anonymous

Virtually all alcoholism treatment programs also include meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), which describes itself as a "worldwide fellowship of men and women who help each other to stay sober." While AA is generally recognized as an effective mutual help program for recovering alcoholics, not everyone responds to AA's style and message, and other recovery approaches are available. Even those who are helped by AA usually find that AA works best in combination with other elements of treatment, including counseling and medical care.

Can Alcoholism Be Cured?

While alcoholism is a treatable disease, a cure is not yet available. That means that even if an alcoholic has been sober for a long while and has regained health, he or she remains susceptible to relapse and must continue to avoid all alcoholic beverages. "Cutting down" on drinking doesn't work; cutting out alcohol is necessary for a successful recovery.

However, even individuals who are determined to stay sober may suffer one or several "slips," or relapses, before achieving long-term sobriety. Relapses are very common and do not mean that a person has failed or cannot eventually recover from alcoholism. Keep in mind, too, that every day that a recovering alcoholic has stayed sober prior to a relapse is extremely valuable time, both to the individual and to his or her family. If a relapse occurs, it is very important to try to stop drinking once again and to get whatever additional support is needed to abstain from drinking.

Help for Alcohol Abuse

If your health care provider determines that you are not alcohol dependent but are nonetheless involved in a pattern of alcohol abuse, he or she can help you:


Examine the benefits of stopping an unhealthy drinking pattern.
Set a drinking goal for yourself. Some people choose to abstain from alcohol, while others prefer to limit the amount they drink.
Examine the situations that trigger your unhealthy drinking patterns, and develop new ways of handling those situations so that you can maintain your drinking goal.

Some individuals who have stopped drinking after experiencing alcohol-related problems choose to attend AA meetings for information and support, even though they have not been diagnosed as alcoholic.

New Directions

With the support of NIAAA, scientists at medical centers and universities throughout the country are studying alcoholism. The goal of this research is to develop more effective ways of treating and preventing alcohol problems. Today, NIAAA funds approximately 90 percent of all alcoholism research in the United States. Some of the more exciting investigations include:

Genetic research: Scientists are now studying 3,000 individuals from several hundred families with a history of alcoholism in order to pinpoint the location of genes that influence vulnerability to alcoholism. This new knowledge will help identify individuals at high risk for alcoholism and also will pave the way for the development of new treatments for alcohol-related problems. Other research is investigating the ways in which genetic and environmental factors combine to cause alcoholism.
Treatment approaches: NIAAA also sponsored a study called Project MATCH, which tested whether treatment outcome could be improved by matching patients to three types of treatment based on particular individual characteristics. This study found that all three types of treatment reduced drinking markedly in the year following treatment.
New medications: Studies supported by NIAAA have led to the Food and Drug Administration's approval of the medication naltrexone (ReViaTM) for the treatment of alcoholism. When used in combination with counseling, this prescription drug lessens the craving for alcohol in many people and helps prevent a return to heavy drinking. Naltrexone is the first medication approved in 45 years to help alcoholics stay sober after they detoxify from alcohol.

In addition to these efforts, NIAAA is sponsoring promising research in other vital areas, such as fetal alcohol syndrome, alcohol's effects on the brain and other organs, aspects of drinkers' environments that may contribute to alcohol abuse and alcoholism, strategies to reduce alcohol-related problems, and new treatment techniques. Together, these investigations will help to prevent alcohol problems; identify alcohol abuse and alcoholism at earlier stages; and make available new, more effective treatment approaches for individuals and families.

TooTough - "I swear - I won´t go if there will be any other hired @#$%&
to replace him." [...] "I would HATE Mick for doing that. Seriously."


...I second all of that. And 'though I'm not part of the "Bring MT Back"-camp (I'm your reguar 'agnostic' on that issue...), don't wanna stirr up all these arguments 'pro' again, nor do I even think the concept is plausible: I sincerely believe that Mick Taylor is the ONLY possible replacement that has some relevance, perspective, authenticity ànd dignity towards the band & its musical legacy.

Quote
Filip020169
TooTough - "I swear - I won´t go if there will be any other hired @#$%&
to replace him." [...] "I would HATE Mick for doing that. Seriously."


...I second all of that. And 'though I'm not part of the "Bring MT Back"-camp (I'm your reguar 'agnostic' on that issue...), don't wanna stirr up all these arguments 'pro' again, nor do I even think the concept is plausible: I sincerely believe that Mick Taylor is the ONLY possible replacement that has some relevance, perspective, authenticity ànd dignity towards the band & its musical legacy.

Agree, especially with the statement .....

<<< Mick Taylor is the ONLY possible replacement that has some relevance, perspective, authenticity ànd dignity towards the band & its musical legacy >>>

Quote
TooTough
If they´d replace Ronnie with Wachtel or Chaplin or Beck
or Lofgren - I would HATE Mick for doing that. Seriously.

And me. Because for me it`s all not about any business, but about strange and difficult friendship and collaboration in spite of all obstacles.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-19 14:10 by kater-v.

Quote
TooTough
If they´d replace Ronnie with Wachtel or Chaplin or Beck
or Lofgren - I would HATE Mick for doing that. Seriously.

It's not that Mick WANTS to replace Ronnie. But if he can't get his act together, he can't pass the medical tests he has to in order to get an insureance for the entire tour. If they're going to tour, and they ARE, they can't go on the road without the insureance. The promotors demand it. Even during the planning of a tour, they spend millions and have to pay guarantees to hotels and the company they rent the jet from. And the building of the stage, and the rented trucks. Then there are salaries for up to 350 people on the road. It's not a cheap little picknick they're planning!
And it works like this: The Stones get a fixed amount from Cohl, who buys all the shows and sells them to the local promotors. There are really big money at stake here, and even if they do want the best for Ronnie, and apreciate what he's done for the band, they can't keep him if he's the one reason why they can't get an insureance. It's not about bad will from the other Stones members. Not at all.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-19 14:19 by Addicted.

Hm, wonder if it's true that they are not talking anymore. it somehow fits that picture from the scan of the classic rock mag article y'day, where ronnie complained about the @#$%& the stones are.

one thing for me is certain, they will never get mick t. back and I'm happy about that. what I think is possible, is that they simply give blondie more volume/freedom. you know, we mustn't make the mistake to think they will replace him with someone famous. not at all, the one to replace him will remain in the shade and keith will be the only guitar player left for the audience to see.

as for ronnie himself, I said earlier that I'm really worried where he might end up...I am curious if he really has some realistic plans (radio shows, new album out, guest gigs) or if it's in fact more true that he has no real plans that might actually generate the amounts of money he would need for his lifestyle...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-19 14:17 by Lorenz.

Quote
paulywaul

Quote
Filip020169
TooTough - "I swear - I won´t go if there will be any other hired @#$%&
to replace him." [...] "I would HATE Mick for doing that. Seriously."


...I second all of that. And 'though I'm not part of the "Bring MT Back"-camp (I'm your reguar 'agnostic' on that issue...), don't wanna stirr up all these arguments 'pro' again, nor do I even think the concept is plausible: I sincerely believe that Mick Taylor is the ONLY possible replacement that has some relevance, perspective, authenticity ànd dignity towards the band & its musical legacy.

Agree, especially with the statement .....

<<< Mick Taylor is the ONLY possible replacement that has some relevance, perspective, authenticity ànd dignity towards the band & its musical legacy >>>

I understand why the MT question keeps coming up, but the word I would question here is "possible". It's a nice dream, but Mick Taylor has had serious health problems very recently, and even if he is physically able to go on a large-scale tour (very doubtful), I don't see any sign that either he or the band would want to do it.

if they replace ronnie they may as well call themselves kiss with all these ridiculous lineup changes, i mean there comes a point where it starts to get silly and IMO the legacy would take a huge hit

If Jo decides to take Ron back, then Ron will be able to function and he will tour in 2010. Without Jo's help , how is he going to be able to sober up and to be reliable on the Tour? But they just got divorced so it's difficult to imagine Jo getting back with Ronnie at this point. It doesn't sound good at all. I am sadded because I love Ron and I want him to be part of the Tour. Get well, you little @#$%& rock and roller.
Rock and Roll,
Mops

So if Jo doesn't take him back, then it's the end of the Stones. Poor Jo.

Quote
ROPENI
well Jagger and Cohl know that they have to put with whatever Keith does,cause without him there are no Rolling Stones, but Ronnie is expendable,and please don't expect them to call Mick Taylor he is in worse shape than Ronnie..

That's ridiculous. Why make bold statements like that if you don't even know Taylor. Mick T is doing fine actually. Certainly not doing the kind of things that seem to be going on in Ronnie's life on a daily basis.

Quote
Harm
If they are going to replace Ronnie, what will be the band's new name?

The Rolling Stones (Mark II).
In the 60s and early 70s they were called the Rolling Stones as well, weren't they ?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-19 16:01 by Lightnin'.

I am in no way a fan of U2, however, Jagger must have been envious during his recent performance with the Edge at Madison Square Garden due to the fact that U2 can manage to have a discernable and distinct guitar sound in concert. Bringing in a hired gun to replace Wood, if that happens,is silly. The Rolling Stones are about history and Taylor was their lead guitarist in their glory years. I hope a new tour features both Mr. Wood and Mr. Taylor. It is one of the few new things of value the band can offer the fans.

Quote
stoneswashed77
ronnie is cool, plays better and has the better sound than keith,

what? you must have them mixed up. Even when keith isn't playing well, his guitar sound is magnificent. ron's is often strangely trashy, considering the quality of his instruments.

If Ronnie doesn't die he'll be on tour 2010 to 2011 or 2011 to 2012. That's also if Keith Mick and Charlie don't die. They'll start in the USA at $500 a ticket and finish in the UK celebrating 50 years. And .. sad to say, that'll be that. Nothings forever. Time Waits For No One. There. The End.

Quote
Green Lady

I understand why the MT question keeps coming up, but the word I would question here is "possible". It's a nice dream, but Mick Taylor has had serious health problems very recently, and even if he is physically able to go on a large-scale tour (very doubtful), I don't see any sign that either he or the band would want to do it.

There might be all kinds of stuff going on behind the scenes that remains hidden from the public's point of view.
Don't you think that taking part in a world tour with the Stones, making use of the machinery, personnel, perks that they have at their disposal will be a hell of a lot easier for Mick T than the DIY tours he's done over the years.

JoJo is one forgiving woman she's no Elin, but if he goes back to Jo there may a guitar involved tuning up over Ronnie's head.

People who pine for Mick Taylor seem to not recognize that Mick T's playing was nothing without the iron fist of Keith chugging that unbelievable rhythm underneath him. Keith can't do that anymore. It wouldn't be '73 again. It would be a mess. Sacking Ronnie and bringing back Mick T wouldn't do a darn thing to slow the progress of Keith's arthritis. The past is the past.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-19 16:43 by From4tilLate.

Quote
From4tilLate
People who pine for Mick Taylor seem to not recognize that Mick T's playing was nothing without the iron fist of Keith chugging that unbelievable rhythm underneath him. Keith can't do that anymore. It wouldn't be '73 again. It would be a mess. Sacking Ronnie and bringing back Mick T wouldn't do a darn thing to slow the progress of Keith's arthritis. The past is the past.

Maybe they should just bring Mick T in for proper guitar sound reinforcement - it might stop Ronnie from getting bored and help him to step up to the batting plate. Ronnie and Mick T go way back.
With three guitarists onboard there must be someone that can strum up a decent rhythm part ? - especially if they rehearse before hand...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-19 16:54 by Lightnin'.

I think we've come up with someting here: The three guitarist (and no, not Blondie) lineup with both shore up the guitar section and honor the Stones history.

One will have to pay the three guitarists.

Do not they already have a third guitarist ?