"they should stick by him as they should have stuck by Brian"

Sure! They should have kept :

- Jimmy Miller (who was so out of it he carved swastikas into the studio mixing board) instead of hiring C.Kimsey
- Bobby Keyes in Sept.73 (who was so out of it... fill the blanks)
- Sam Cutler (who was so out of it he didn't see Altamont happening)

A band like any other structure need FUNCTIONAL people. What you probably haven't understood yet is that within the Stones camp the R&Roll lifestyle comes **after** the job's done (playing a gig, cutting a new song).
Ronnie like others hasn't.

Quote
Harm
so the O2 gig was my final Stones concert as I see the Stones?

Mine too, if they would sack him.

I´m really disappointed about most of the people here, happy to replace
Ronnie immediately.

No Ronnie, no Stones!

Quote
Harm
so the O2 gig was my final Stones concert as I see the Stones?

My final Stones concert as I see the Stones was the last show with Bill Wyman.

I remember that during the Licks Tour rehearsals, some people said that Ronnie was very close to die, that the Stones were unable to play, ready to cancel the whole tour and that they even didn't rehearse but played some tapes loud to hide the problem. So, nothing new under the sun, here we go again with the same old bullshits.

I think we all hope that it's just bullshite and we can go back to the discussion to have MT as a guestplayer for just a few songs on the next tour

Quote
Harm
so the O2 gig was my final Stones concert as I see the Stones?

I see it the same way if they going to tour without Ron!

The last stonesconcert at the O2 in 2007.

"mollycoddling"?...never heard that one before, gazza, very funny.
btw, i'm surprised ron wood is still alive.

We are heading in the direction of something sounding like the Mick Jagger solo tour of Japan in 1988. For the benefit of those that haven't heard it MJ plays a string of slick, soulless, colourless, insiped, luke warm versions of Stone songs.

Don't do it boys. Either take Ronnie for all his faults or call it a day.

With or without Ronnie, you STILL have 60% of the ORIGINAL lineup. Replace him with MT, and you have 80% of the 1969 lineup. Who wouldn't like to see that? Who wouldn't be more likely to buy a ticket if you COULD see that?

Quote
TooTough

Quote
Harm
so the O2 gig was my final Stones concert as I see the Stones?

Mine too, if they would sack him.

I´m really disappointed about most of the people here, happy to replace
Ronnie immediately.

No Ronnie, no Stones!

+1 TT....Strange how some want to throw Woody out without a second thought after the guy was so faithful to the band for 34+ years. It can be argued that there would not be a Rolling Stones to debate about without Woody there to balance Sir Mick and Keef.....Also interesting there was not such an outcry when Keef fell out of that tree "picking coconuts" and the tour was postponed several months...sure picking coconuts...yeah right

And based on Keefs playing last tour if you are going to argue music first then the RnR lifestyle maybe he should have been kicked out of the band as he was barely functonal on some of the ABB shows and Woody and the others had to cover his ass.........no Ronnie no Stones I say!!!

Quote
Harm
And let's not forget Keith either.... it's not that he has been surging and soaring on the last tour

Exactly. They have to replace Ronnie and Keith. And yes, Thorogood would be perfect, wouldn't he? In fact, he boogies so hard he could replace both of them. There's your new Rolling Stones, ladies and gentlemen.

God do you lot get excited about nothing! Its one article from Th Daily Mail! So were gonna replace keith as well eh? Fairy land stuff......

Quote
tatters
With or without Ronnie, you STILL have 60% of the ORIGINAL lineup. Replace him with MT, and you have 80% of the 1969 lineup. Who wouldn't like to see that? Who wouldn't be more likely to buy a ticket if you COULD see that?

Well, it's not about %. It's about sentiments. Replace Mick Jagger and what do you have? Nothing = or in your terms 0%

Quote
Harm

Quote
tatters
With or without Ronnie, you STILL have 60% of the ORIGINAL lineup. Replace him with MT, and you have 80% of the 1969 lineup. Who wouldn't like to see that? Who wouldn't be more likely to buy a ticket if you COULD see that?

Well, it's not about %. It's about sentiments. Replace Mick Jagger and what do you have? Nothing = or in your terms 0%

We're not talking about replacing Mick, or any other original member. We're talking about replacing the guy who replaced the guy who replaced Brian.

Maybe this is something being said to make Ronnie wake up and decide to live by those that care about him. (reverse psychology) because people care about him and know how much he loves to play

Quote
tatters

Quote
Harm

Quote
tatters
With or without Ronnie, you STILL have 60% of the ORIGINAL lineup. Replace him with MT, and you have 80% of the 1969 lineup. Who wouldn't like to see that? Who wouldn't be more likely to buy a ticket if you COULD see that?

Well, it's not about %. It's about sentiments. Replace Mick Jagger and what do you have? Nothing = or in your terms 0%

We're not talking about replacing Mick, or any other original member. We're talking about replacing the guy who replaced the guy who replaced Brian.

That's where we differ. To me Ronnie is not the guy who replaced the guy (his name is Mick Taylor BTW) who replaced Brian Jones.

If they tour without Ronnie, they should just let Blondie step up to the open stage.

Quote
squando
Everything Gazza said.

For speculations sake who do you think they'd get to replace him Gazza? A already known name or a D Jones type setup?

Man I hope this twit finally gets his sh*t together. He's behaved like a child most of his life and really needs to grow the hell up.

He wouldnt be formally replaced. They'd just bring someone in as a salaried employee. The Stones arent going to give up a slice of the pie for anyone.

No idea who they could/would replace him with, but I'm sure there would be plenty of applicants.

If you were to inist on an answer, though - Jeff Beck.

He even has the right haircut.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-20 16:52 by Gazza.

Ronnie as the soul of the band? WHAAAAT?

Keith gave Ron a warning a loong time by stating : "The Stones are me Mick and Charlie. If one of us stops that's it".

Translation : Ron is expendable... he's not a founding member so as soon as he's more troubles than profits he's out.

Get it now?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-12-20 16:25 by dcba.

I don't think Ron Wood will be replaced. He might be turned down even lower than in '99 but I think he will be there.
Why could they not get insurance with Wood?

Thorogood?? Has anyone heard from him in last 25 years? Say what you will about Ronnie Wood, but as his worst he blows Thorogood away. The slides for ADTL, Happy, the pedal steel, the sitar for SFM - Thorogood???

Quote
texas fan

Quote
Harm
And let's not forget Keith either.... it's not that he has been surging and soaring on the last tour

Exactly. They have to replace Ronnie and Keith. And yes, Thorogood would be perfect, wouldn't he? In fact, he boogies so hard he could replace both of them. There's your new Rolling Stones, ladies and gentlemen.

Oh, let's just replace the whole damn pack of them with the Rollin' Stoned and have done with it!

Quote
DeliveranceStraightwayHoliness
Thorogood?? Has anyone heard from him in last 25 years?

He's still out there. Comes around my town about once a year.

Quote
TooTough

Quote
Harm
so the O2 gig was my final Stones concert as I see the Stones?

Mine too, if they would sack him.

I´m really disappointed about most of the people here, happy to replace
Ronnie immediately.

No Ronnie, no Stones!

For the record, I'm not 'happy' at all about it - and I doubt too many are. Whats happening to the guy is an absolute tragedy, but its one of his own making, which he has numerous opportunities to put right but won't do so. Not 'can't do so' - but 'won't do so'.

He's been aware for some time that the band he's in are planning to tour in 2010 and that he has a responsibility to his fellow bandmates and the people who depend on them for their livelihood to sort himself out, and yet he continues to embark on this path towards self destruction at an alarming rate.

And yet, according to some posters on here, its everyone else but Ronnie who are being selfish?

I want him to be in shape for a tour and to get his life together as much as anyone, but what if he doesn't? Should everyone else's lives and careers be put on hold because one man seems hellbent on drinking himself into oblivion?

There's been a lot of the 'Go Ronnie, Youre a Real Rock n roller' crowd who have encouraged his antics for the last 18 months and badmouthed everyone who lived in the real world and could see where this was all leading as a bunch of pseudo-Celine Dion fans who couldnt grasp the whole concept of what the Stones supposedly stand for. Seems a lot of those people are a bit quiet at the minute. (this isnt aimed at you, by the way)

Now surely everyone can see that his lifestyle has not only put his future as a Stone in doubt but has also threatened the band's future touring plans.

Hey Jumpinjackflash59, you remind me of an ostrich with its head in the sand.

Quote
mtaylor
I think he (GT) was considered as a band member as well, when they already at that point (1981) had problems with Ronnie. So, no news about Ronnie being a problem.
Stones have accepted very much and have been very easygoing with Ronnies ongoing problem.

They certainly have not.

Thorogood was never a 'band member'.

Where do you people come up with such garbage like that?

Quote
oldschool

Quote
TooTough

Quote
Harm
so the O2 gig was my final Stones concert as I see the Stones?

Mine too, if they would sack him.

I´m really disappointed about most of the people here, happy to replace
Ronnie immediately.

No Ronnie, no Stones!

+1 TT....Strange how some want to throw Woody out without a second thought after the guy was so faithful to the band for 34+ years. It can be argued that there would not be a Rolling Stones to debate about without Woody there to balance Sir Mick and Keef.....Also interesting there was not such an outcry when Keef fell out of that tree "picking coconuts" and the tour was postponed several months...sure picking coconuts...yeah right

Sorry, but its not the same.

If a tour gets postponed because a band member has an injury or illness - fair enough, you wait til he gets better, make sure he's medically clear to continue and then restart the tour.

In this case, the issue is whether a band member can get medical insurance to go on the road to begin with. Amazing that some people can't get this.

If Ronnie (or anyone else for that matter) can't get the insurance because of his health, then he CAN'T TOUR EVEN IF THE BAND WANT HIM TO. The ONLY alternatives are either they dont tour at all or they do so without him.

If Keith hadn't been given the medical clearance to resume touring after his accident, then the tour would have been over.

But so far we actually know nothing. There is nothing official.

Quote
dcba
Ronnie as the soul of the band? WHAAAAT?

Keith gave Ron a warning a loong time by stating : "The Stones are me Mick and Charlie. If one of us stops that's it".

Translation : Ron is expendable... he's not a founding member so as soon as he's more troubles than profits he's out.

Get it now?

No but you were close...Charlie is the soul of the band but Woody is the conscience...do you get it??........

Quote
skipstone
But so far we actually know nothing. There is nothing official.

Indeed. Let's enjoy the rest of the day...