Quote
Jos
they changed it back to present

Quote
Amsterdamned

Quote
leteyer
I'm sure it means nothing.

Mick Taylor is not available and other than Jimmy Page or Jeff Beck there is no other guitar player I would like to see with the Stones.

There are a 10000000 players that could do it...

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Jos
they changed it back to present

So he was temporarily out, as I suggested. Just a shot across the bow, to let him and us now what his position is. Nothing (new).

Quote
leteyer

Quote
Amsterdamned

Quote
leteyer
I'm sure it means nothing.

Mick Taylor is not available and other than Jimmy Page or Jeff Beck there is no other guitar player I would like to see with the Stones.

There are a 10000000 players that could do it...

Yes, of course but I won't like 'em...

Quote
steffiestones

Quote
Amsterdamned

Quote
leteyer
I'm sure it means nothing.

Mick Taylor is not available and other than Jimmy Page or Jeff Beck there is no other guitar player I would like to see with the Stones.

There are a 10000000 players that could do it...

For big $$$ is everyone available!

Quote
Stones Blah
One of you picture guys should go to Ethan Russells 72 tour pics and post the picture of Charlie and Keith they labelled Charlie and Mick, so they can fix that too. Or are they watching us and fixing it as we "speak". Yes I mean rollingstone.com

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Jos
they changed it back to present

So he was temporarily out, as I suggested. Just a shot across the bow, to let him and us now what his position is. Nothing (new).

Quote
boogie1969

Quote
treaclefingers
There is really nothing concrete to base all the speculation on.

Where there is smoke, there is fire though. I just think it's curious he's talking about a FACES tour, and getting ready to release his solo album according to his website, and he's NOT promoting exile with everyone else.

I don't care if he didn't play on it, he is currently a 'full member' of the band.

That makes zero sense. Mick and Keith are getting asked question after question about the period of time from spring 71 through Exile's release in May 72, of which Ronnie had no part of. He can't talk about an experience he has no actual first-hand knowledge of, and any answers he gives would merely be from stories he's heard the others tell. And to top it all off, he's a bullshit artist.

I get where your coming from, he's a member of the group so he should be involved regardless of what it is they are doing. But in this case, how is that suppose to work? He can give his thoughts and opinions, but he can't really contribute anything truly relevant to the dialogue like someone who was actually there can. What's he supposed to do, just sit there and say the album's great, buy it?

And for everyone trying to read something into what the website says about Ronnie, it does say on the main page Ronnie Wood 1976-2010, but under the band members tab on the galleries page, it says 1976-present. Given the site's reputation for sloppiness and inaccuracies, I wouldn't read too much into it.

Quote
skipstone
There's that Noone guy again.

He refuses to go away, yet makes zero sense.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
bernardanderson
kleermaker, how do you know this?

[www.rollingstones.com]

Quote
Amsterdamned

Jones 5 years, Taylor 5 years,Wood 35 years. Time for a last change?

Quote
Kurt
I am officially tired and flat out angered at the Ronnie Wood bashing that has hit an all time high with the re-release of Exile. As far as I'm concerned, Ronnie is as much of "The Rolling Stones" these days as Charlie is. Without either of them, there is no more Stones. (Of course, Mick and Keith remain exempt from the debate.)

Sorry, but I'm 45 years old and I could give ashit about Mick Taylor ever coming back. I never saw him live. Being a fan of the Stones for the last 31 years certainly gives me the right to dimiss Taylor from the conversation completely. Look, I love the entire catalog, but Mick Taylor has never been a working member of the group in my "lifetime" as a fan. Bringing him back would only appeal to an extremely limited number of "diehards", and would not help ticket sales one way or the other. In the grand scheme of life, my friends and family consider me a diehard fan, and I would agree.

In life you can either live in the past or live in the now. I choose the latter.

Thanks for listening.

Quote
StonesTod
you're welcome, Kurt. but polls indicate the ronnie bashing actually hit an all-time high a little over a year ago. there were several other spikes during the ensuing months, then a slight dip, a flat line and then an uptick during this month of exile mania.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
boogie1969

Quote
treaclefingers
There is really nothing concrete to base all the speculation on.

Where there is smoke, there is fire though. I just think it's curious he's talking about a FACES tour, and getting ready to release his solo album according to his website, and he's NOT promoting exile with everyone else.

I don't care if he didn't play on it, he is currently a 'full member' of the band.

That makes zero sense. Mick and Keith are getting asked question after question about the period of time from spring 71 through Exile's release in May 72, of which Ronnie had no part of. He can't talk about an experience he has no actual first-hand knowledge of, and any answers he gives would merely be from stories he's heard the others tell. And to top it all off, he's a bullshit artist.

I get where your coming from, he's a member of the group so he should be involved regardless of what it is they are doing. But in this case, how is that suppose to work? He can give his thoughts and opinions, but he can't really contribute anything truly relevant to the dialogue like someone who was actually there can. What's he supposed to do, just sit there and say the album's great, buy it?

And for everyone trying to read something into what the website says about Ronnie, it does say on the main page Ronnie Wood 1976-2010, but under the band members tab on the galleries page, it says 1976-present. Given the site's reputation for sloppiness and inaccuracies, I wouldn't read too much into it.

Well, I also understand what you're saying. However, it's like a football team winning the world cup. Just because the alternate didn't play in the game, doesn't mean he still isn't part of the team, or part of the celebrations.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
StonesTod
you're welcome, Kurt. but polls indicate the ronnie bashing actually hit an all-time high a little over a year ago. there were several other spikes during the ensuing months, then a slight dip, a flat line and then an uptick during this month of exile mania.

Why can't we leave Ronnie alone. I'm all up for a little Charlie bashing...why can't we ever get a little traction on that.

How about this...
he's overdressed to be a rocker...I mean, suits?? Really.
Does he think he's a jazz player or something?? (work with me here!)

Quote
boogie1969

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
boogie1969

Quote
treaclefingers
There is really nothing concrete to base all the speculation on.

Where there is smoke, there is fire though. I just think it's curious he's talking about a FACES tour, and getting ready to release his solo album according to his website, and he's NOT promoting exile with everyone else.

I don't care if he didn't play on it, he is currently a 'full member' of the band.

That makes zero sense. Mick and Keith are getting asked question after question about the period of time from spring 71 through Exile's release in May 72, of which Ronnie had no part of. He can't talk about an experience he has no actual first-hand knowledge of, and any answers he gives would merely be from stories he's heard the others tell. And to top it all off, he's a bullshit artist.

I get where your coming from, he's a member of the group so he should be involved regardless of what it is they are doing. But in this case, how is that suppose to work? He can give his thoughts and opinions, but he can't really contribute anything truly relevant to the dialogue like someone who was actually there can. What's he supposed to do, just sit there and say the album's great, buy it?

And for everyone trying to read something into what the website says about Ronnie, it does say on the main page Ronnie Wood 1976-2010, but under the band members tab on the galleries page, it says 1976-present. Given the site's reputation for sloppiness and inaccuracies, I wouldn't read too much into it.

Well, I also understand what you're saying. However, it's like a football team winning the world cup. Just because the alternate didn't play in the game, doesn't mean he still isn't part of the team, or part of the celebrations.

No, it's not like a benchwarmer on a sports team celebrating being champs, especially if they are celebrating a victory from 30 years ago. A benchwarmer, alternate, whatever, may have played at some point in the season, somehow contributed to the overall victory by being there. They can speak about the season and what it was like because they were there, even if it was on the sidelines. Plus, they get paid for it too, regardless of how small their contributions may have been.

Ronnie had shit to do with Exile, has know idea what it was really like to record it, and doesn't get money from it. It's more like having Ringo promote a re-release of Band On The Run.

If it sells a million copies, do you think Ron should get a platinum disc too? I don't think it works that way.

Quote
Kurt
I am officially tired and flat out angered at the Ronnie Wood bashing that has hit an all time high with the re-release of Exile. As far as I'm concerned, Ronnie is as much of "The Rolling Stones" these days as Charlie is. Without either of them, there is no more Stones. (Of course, Mick and Keith remain exempt from the debate.)

Sorry, but I'm 45 years old and I could give ashit about Mick Taylor ever coming back. I never saw him live. Being a fan of the Stones for the last 31 years certainly gives me the right to dimiss Taylor from the conversation completely. Look, I love the entire catalog, but Mick Taylor has never been a working member of the group in my "lifetime" as a fan. Bringing him back would only appeal to an extremely limited number of "diehards", and would not help ticket sales one way or the other. In the grand scheme of life, my friends and family consider me a diehard fan, and I would agree.

In life you can either live in the past or live in the now. I choose the latter.

Thanks for listening.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
StonesTod
you're welcome, Kurt. but polls indicate the ronnie bashing actually hit an all-time high a little over a year ago. there were several other spikes during the ensuing months, then a slight dip, a flat line and then an uptick during this month of exile mania.

Why can't we leave Ronnie alone. I'm all up for a little Charlie bashing...why can't we ever get a little traction on that.

How about this...
he's overdressed to be a rocker...I mean, suits?? Really.
Does he think he's a jazz player or something?? (work with me here!)

charlie gets a free pass cos we all commiserate with him - it's his sad misfortune to be in the band for his entire life, and we're all sensitive to that.

having said that, i'm up for some charlie bashing; bashing a drummer can be a little redundant, however.
-
hey charlie: you're a grown man in an adult band: GET A REAL DRUMSET ALREADY!

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
StonesTod
you're welcome, Kurt. but polls indicate the ronnie bashing actually hit an all-time high a little over a year ago. there were several other spikes during the ensuing months, then a slight dip, a flat line and then an uptick during this month of exile mania.

Why can't we leave Ronnie alone. I'm all up for a little Charlie bashing...why can't we ever get a little traction on that.

How about this...
he's overdressed to be a rocker...I mean, suits?? Really.
Does he think he's a jazz player or something?? (work with me here!)

charlie gets a free pass cos we all commiserate with him - it's his sad misfortune to be in the band for his entire life, and we're all sensitive to that.

having said that, i'm up for some charlie bashing; bashing a drummer can be a little redundant, however.
-
hey charlie: you're a grown man in an adult band: GET A REAL DRUMSET ALREADY!

Yeah!

And what's with the freakin' haircut??? What the F*CK is up with that??
Grow it long, like Mick, or, wear a bandana like Keith or Brett Michaels!

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Kurt
I am officially tired and flat out angered at the Ronnie Wood bashing that has hit an all time high with the re-release of Exile. As far as I'm concerned, Ronnie is as much of "The Rolling Stones" these days as Charlie is. Without either of them, there is no more Stones. (Of course, Mick and Keith remain exempt from the debate.)

Sorry, but I'm 45 years old and I could give ashit about Mick Taylor ever coming back. I never saw him live. Being a fan of the Stones for the last 31 years certainly gives me the right to dimiss Taylor from the conversation completely. Look, I love the entire catalog, but Mick Taylor has never been a working member of the group in my "lifetime" as a fan. Bringing him back would only appeal to an extremely limited number of "diehards", and would not help ticket sales one way or the other. In the grand scheme of life, my friends and family consider me a diehard fan, and I would agree.

In life you can either live in the past or live in the now. I choose the latter.

Thanks for listening.

And if the guitar playing "now" sucks, then what? Seriously, criticizing performance, skills and behavior is not necessarily "bashing", nor is suggesting that Mr. Wood's playing in recent years (oh, about 20 or 25 in my book) leaves a lot to be desired mean that one expects or even wants Mick Taylor to come back. Very few have suggested that it would help ticket sales. There are legitimate critics here of Wood, and of the Stones' guitar sound in general recently. It doesn't help Mr. wood's cause that he behaves like a buffoon and has become fodder for the tabloids. You may defend that if you wish, others choose not to.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
StonesTod
you're welcome, Kurt. but polls indicate the ronnie bashing actually hit an all-time high a little over a year ago. there were several other spikes during the ensuing months, then a slight dip, a flat line and then an uptick during this month of exile mania.

Why can't we leave Ronnie alone. I'm all up for a little Charlie bashing...why can't we ever get a little traction on that.

How about this...
he's overdressed to be a rocker...I mean, suits?? Really.
Does he think he's a jazz player or something?? (work with me here!)

charlie gets a free pass cos we all commiserate with him - it's his sad misfortune to be in the band for his entire life, and we're all sensitive to that.

having said that, i'm up for some charlie bashing; bashing a drummer can be a little redundant, however.
-
hey charlie: you're a grown man in an adult band: GET A REAL DRUMSET ALREADY!

Yeah!

And what's with the freakin' haircut??? What the F*CK is up with that??
Grow it long, like Mick, or, wear a bandana like Keith or Brett Michaels!

and that making drawings of all your hotel rooms while on tour? ummmm...memo to charlie: ROCK AND ROLLERS PARTY AFTER THE SHOW!

Quote
treaclefingers

True, but the drawings are nice. Maybe he could be coached into doing drawings of the parties?