Quote
WilliamPatrickMaynard
And we have the first one to take the bait. Thanks for joining in the fun, Mary.

I do not know much about guitars and guitarists, so let someone more knowledgeable dwell upon it

Knowledge is not a prerequisite for speculation.

Besides, I wasn't being serious anyway. Whether they tour or not, I don't think Keith can be fired easily if at all. I suspect the three originals remaining are legally required to use the name. I don't know that for a fact.

It's all over - NME from Contact Music:

[www.nme.com]

Quote
mtaylor
It's all over - NME from Contact Music:

LOL, this is really incredible

-------------------
Keep On Rolling

Quote
WilliamPatrickMaynard
Knowledge is not a prerequisite for speculation.

Besides, I wasn't being serious anyway. Whether they tour or not, I don't think Keith can be fired easily if at all. I suspect the three originals remaining are legally required to use the name. I don't know that for a fact.

I was kidding too, of couse I understood you' weren't serious.
But human stupidity never ceases to amaze me. Those Jagger's words - obviously a joke - were taken out of context and turned into skoop. Now NME also supports this BS


September 12, 2011 14:02
Mick Jagger: 'Keith Richards can’t come to The Rolling Stones' 50th anniversary' The rift between the elderly rockers doesn't seem to have healed

Mick Jagger has said that he’d like The Rolling Stones to be given a plaque for their 50th anniversary next year, but that Keith Richards wouldn’t be allowed to come to the unveiling ceremony.

The band played their first show at London’s Marquee Club in 1962 and Jagger has said that the band probably won’t tour to celebrate their half-century, but would like a plaque to be unveiled at the venue instead.

He explained to Live magazine via Contact Music:
Maybe we could go back to the Marquee to accept a plaque for 50 years of service instead of a tour. That could work - except Keith obviously can't come. Charlie Watts [who wasn't in the band in 1962] can come but he wouldn't get the plaque obviously.
Jagger and Richards fell out when Richards mocked the size of Jagger’s manhood in his million-selling autobiography Life. Richards also labelled Jagger "unbearable" in the best-seller.

"I used to love Mick, but I haven't been to his dressing room in 20 years," Richards said. "Sometimes I think, 'I miss my friend'. I wonder, 'Where did he go?'."

The book saw the guitarist talk candidly about Jagger, and in it he also said: "It was the beginning of the '80s when Mick started to become unbearable."

[www.nme.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-09-12 19:26 by proudmary.

but really - what a tone in this NME article.
but I was right at the very beginning of this story - I mean after the publication of Life - that all the relationships between Jagger and Richards as all that relates the Stones will be flavoured with Todgergate. They might ignore it at this board but outside fan forums the only thing that draws attention of the wide public and music critics is the supposed Mick's reaction on KR todger remark. WHether there will be a tour or a new album is of minor importance as compared to this. Was that KR's primary intention?

Quote
proudmary
will be flavoured with Todgergate. They might ignore it at this board

Ignore it ???? Here at this board ???? You must be joking right? How many threads haven't we had about it ?

-------------------
Keep On Rolling

Quote
proudmary
Was that KR's primary intention?

LOL, yeah, of course. What else ?
Really, best joke of this year.

-------------------
Keep On Rolling

Something to spice up the ongoing story )

"However, Jagger has an ongoing feud with fellow Rolling Stone Keith Richards, fuelled when Richards described him as ‘unbearable’ in his autobiography and confessed to sleeping with his then girlfriend, Marianne Faithfull."

"It means Jagger dismisses the idea of a 50th anniversary Stones tour next year but he hasn’t ruled out a one-off gig at the scene of their first performance – London’s Marquee Club.

He said: ‘There isn’t [a tour] so far. But there might be anything, anything can happen . . . Maybe we could go back to the Marquee to accept a plaque for 50 years of service. That could work – except Keith can’t obviously come."

Mick must be laughing all the way to his publicist....

Never ceases to amaze me how some Stones fans read the same original articles as the rest of us, watch how the more conniving elements of the world's press copy and paste selected extracts and twist it into something it isn't, and then fall for it hook, line and sinker EVERY time. Even though they have more 'facts' at their disposal than the average journalist (such as the fact that this article was actually written weeks before the Stones' recent meeting)

The sheer gullibility is truly mind-boggling. To a journalist, it must be akin to shooting fish in a barrel.

Quote
mtaylor
It's all over - NME from Contact Music:

[www.nme.com]

if its from Contact, it must be true, then.

The Weekly World News of music journalism.

I don't think anyone fell for it in this thread with the possible exception of Outlaw who seemed to be asking for opinions.

I think one did, Bill....and I'm sure there'll be more. And possibly new threads on the same subject before the day is out.

Quote
Rolling Hansie

Quote
proudmary
Was that KR's primary intention?

LOL, yeah, of course. What else ?
Really, best joke of this year.

Yes, I will repeat once again - what Richards wrote caused irreparable damage to the Stones. It may have been ment as a joke, but then how it has evolved - it's not funny anymore

I like these metathreads. Who cares about facts?

LOL...Jagger probably made that quip on purpose for obvious reasons. The music press fell for it just as he hoped they would. What's the follow up to this next...Jagger is auditioning guitarists for the 50th??? Of course, you'll hear the usual suspects: Beck, Clapton, Taylor, etc...

That will be followed up by, "Enraged Richards will roll with his own (version of) the Stones"

Just wait till some kind of Superheavy tour or shows are announced!

Could be a fun fall Stones-wise after all!

Quote
proudmary
Yes, I will repeat once again - what Richards wrote caused irreparable damage to the Stones. It may have been ment as a joke, but then how it has evolved - it's not funny anymore

the fact that it has evolved is not funny, no. in fact, it's ridiculous. and who is responsible for it evolving? the media and us, the people. we only have ourselves to blame.

well to me, it sounds like a storm in a teacup

Quote
proudmary


Yes, I will repeat once again - what Richards wrote caused irreparable damage to the Stones. It may have been ment as a joke, but then how it has evolved - it's not funny anymore

I think you'll find soon enough that it hasn't.

That would be a fun teacup to be in.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
proudmary


Yes, I will repeat once again - what Richards wrote caused irreparable damage to the Stones. It may have been ment as a joke, but then how it has evolved - it's not funny anymore

I think you'll find soon enough that it hasn't.

of course it has! the stones aren't touring this year because keith said mick had a small penis!!

I'd like to rephrase Mary's remark to read that Mick's tiny todger will forever flavor news articles on the band. Rather appropriate when you consider the lapping tongue logo.

Quote
WilliamPatrickMaynard
I don't think anyone fell for it in this thread with the possible exception of Outlaw who seemed to be asking for opinions.

Yep, and it's all clear to me now. Thanks all.

Quote
ineedadrink

Quote
proudmary
Yes, I will repeat once again - what Richards wrote caused irreparable damage to the Stones. It may have been ment as a joke, but then how it has evolved - it's not funny anymore

the fact that it has evolved is not funny, no. in fact, it's ridiculous. and who is responsible for it evolving? the media and us, the people. we only have ourselves to blame.

Can't agree. Richards is the one to blame. First think than speak, he's not 5 years old.

Dragonsky, I can't figure out whether Marianne or Anita were the teacup in question.

Quote
marcovandereijk
What's the reputation of Daily Mail with regards to quoting people right, complete and within context?

Not good. But what an entertaining article! Todgergate, that's a keeper.

I am sure that if Jagger didn't want Keith at the Marquee he wouldn't have attended a band meeting with him just last week.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
proudmary


Yes, I will repeat once again - what Richards wrote caused irreparable damage to the Stones. It may have been ment as a joke, but then how it has evolved - it's not funny anymore

I think you'll find soon enough that it hasn't.

how? do you mean that they will soon be touring? so what? Mick Jagger has turned into an object of ridicule.
Almost a year has passed since the publication of the KR book - but the theme of Mick's penis is still hot.
who cares about tour or album or music - no, only this cheap embarrassing reality show is the matter of public interest.
I consider this to be damage to the Stones and their legacy

And the award for IORR Board Drama Queen goes to.......