I figured the 2021 tour was all set up and they had a contractual obligation to complete it with Charlie's choice of Steve Jordan and blessing as his replacement. But Keith famously said many years ago "No Charlie, No Stones." And now they voluntarily go out without him? Talk about staying at the party too long. I will always love their catalogue but they took a real nosedive in the integrity department. They are no different than Frank Sinatra or Jerry Lewis in the "go away, it's long over department."

A word of warning - you’re not allowed to discuss this here.

Because they want to

Here we go again. Geeez

Since when are "we not allowed to discuss this."? It is a major occurrence in the band's history and I want to know what other non-Zombies think. You can keep your mouth shut.

Quote
Spodlumt
I figured the 2021 tour was all set up and they had a contractual obligation to complete it with Charlie's choice of Steve Jordan and blessing as his replacement. But Keith famously said many years ago "No Charlie, No Stones." And now they voluntarily go out without him? Talk about staying at the party too long. I will always love their catalogue but they took a real nosedive in the integrity department. They are no different than Frank Sinatra or Jerry Lewis in the "go away, it's long over department."

That was then, this is now. Don't you ever change your mind? Is everything you ever said engraved in stone forever?

It's their band and they can do whatever they like. Live with it. Or simply stop supporting them. Your choice.

They are not touring without Charlie. They are touring with Steve.

Because Charlie said it, go touring without me........

__________________________

Quote
Spodlumt
Since when are "we not allowed to discuss this."? It is a major occurrence in the band's history and I want to know what other non-Zombies think. You can keep your mouth shut.

Because I asked the same question as you elsewhere and it was removed.

Take a moment to think before you stupidly tell me to ‘keep my mouth shut’

They want t tour, so they tour. I was skeptical in the beginning but still getting on a plane and a train to see them.

Quote
Spodlumt
Since when are "we not allowed to discuss this."? It is a major occurrence in the band's history and I want to know what other non-Zombies think. You can keep your mouth shut.

Because there are certain topics that become contentious, inevitably leading to unpleasant and/or hot-headed comments. Like, for example, the one I have quoted. As you well know.

This site is run by one man, who runs it without ads, for free, in his ‘spare’ time, and does so beautifully. It costs him countless hours to moderate, and he is getting tired of putting in the time to deal with posts like this, especially after making his wishes abundantly clear on many occasions. Tired enough to maybe wrap this up. And if these types of comments continue to cause him grief, it will happen sooner than later, and we will all be very much the less for it. This is not a public site and you have no entitlements here. None of us do. So kindly mind your manners. Treat this like his home - not yours. Please and thank you.

Very well said, STG.

Quote
Marmalade
Very well said, STG.

Thank you, Lady M. Hope you’re well. Spring here today!

Quote
NICOS
Because Charlie said it, go touring without me........

This tour was planned with Charlie's approval of another very competent drummer stepping in for him. I personally may have no desire to see it, but that ain't my or anybody else's call except the three remaining members. Many fans around the world are still lining up to get tickets to see them. For 60 years in, that is truly amazing!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-03-21 02:39 by Sighunt.

Quote
Spodlumt

But Keith famously said many years ago "No Charlie, No Stones." And now they voluntarily go out without him?

Keith in a interview (published 12-Mar-2022) - [iorr.org] :

"My feeling is that we will be on tour later this year. And after that, maybe we'll think about how we want to finish the record." Q: "Even without Charlie?" Keith: "Yeah, we're going to keep going. The band is forcing us."

Does a family stop when someone passes away?

Why are they touring without Charlie? Because Charlie sadly died, but the rest of the band is alive and well enough to tour and millions of people all over the world want to see them.

The good news is you don't have to see them, post about them, read about them, watch concert clips on Youtube. It's a choice. Just like all those Jerry Lewis and Frank Sinatra fans, whatever that meant.

Charlie Watts passed away 24 August 2021 ....

Since then there have been numerous interviews
with Mick and esp lately with Keith saying why
they are still active & touring ...

Maybe worth going back and reading them
and getting a handle on whats going on Spodlump



ROCKMAN

Wow. Thanks for the schooling! I will now think like all of you. Learned the error of my ways. Will no longer offer a differing viewpoint. The group is the way to go. Critical thinking is very bad.

Quote
Spodlumt
I figured the 2021 tour was all set up and they had a contractual obligation to complete it with Charlie's choice of Steve Jordan and blessing as his replacement. But Keith famously said many years ago "No Charlie, No Stones." And now they voluntarily go out without him? Talk about staying at the party too long. I will always love their catalogue but they took a real nosedive in the integrity department. They are no different than Frank Sinatra or Jerry Lewis in the "go away, it's long over department."

I scanned the responses so I will respond in serious kindness:

They did have a contractual obligation in regard to not losing millions of dollars. AC/DC did similar quite recently. Don't think that these kind of artists, no matter how big they are, can do what they want: they can't.

What Keith said then is what he said then. John Lennon said, Life is what happens when you make plans.

Or something like that.

Don't mistake Keith's passion for reality. If that was the case, the Stones would've ended in 1991 when Bill retired.

Charlie was correct when he said he was replaceable. He wasn't being negative about his role in The Rolling Stones, just that they could find another drummer and continue on.

That was years ago.

A band is a band. How a band is defined by fans vs by entity is not always the same.

Regardless your age and however long being a Stones fan, you are not required to like anything else they do. When they're long enough past done and or gone, the 1968-1981 albums will still mean, basically, the same thing as they do now and have, probably just like the rest of them.

The Rolling Stones have always persevered. It's not that they've "moved on", they've just continued. At least they're not "Lynrd Skynrd" or, oddly enough, as Mick has compared the Stones to, "The Beach Boys".

Those two in quotations because neither of them are anywhere near the original idea yet alone versions.

Quote
steadyrollinman
They are not touring without Charlie. They are touring with Steve.

great response you win this thread

that's my new default answer to this question

Because people want to see them. It's in their blood. Led Zeppelin felt differently, though they could have continued with another drummer with heavy hands. The Who should have quit when Moon died, but Entwistle couldn't afford it. Don't know why they went on after John died.

They contractually had to tour. Charlie died. They carried on, and gradually Steve fit in. He fits in a lot better than Darryl.

Even The Jacksons toured after Michael died



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-03-21 08:19 by NilsHolgersson.

Why do they tour without Brian?
Why do they tour without Mick Taylor?
Why do they tour without Bill?¨
Why do they tour without Charlie?

Because they can.
And because they love to perform live.
Should they dig a hole in the ground and go down into it and hide?
I don't think so.

By the way, I never DELETE these "why do they tour without Charlie" threads.
There are many of them, many, many, it seems many fans want their own "I miss Charlie thread".
I just merge them where they belong, into the main Charlie thread.
The same will happen with this thread.

Bjornulf

Quote
Spodlumt
Wow. Thanks for the schooling! I will now think like all of you. Learned the error of my ways. Will no longer offer a differing viewpoint. The group is the way to go. Critical thinking is very bad.

You asked the question. Presumably you really did want to hear other people's thoughts?.........(which of course always held the danger of them telling you what they thought of your question too.

Re Charlie. He said once that "We couldn't do this if we didn't have the energy for it"...............I guess the remaining Stones have decided they do have the energy for it. I suppose you've heard the saying "Life is what happens when you're busy making other plans (or rules - even ones laid down previously, in all sincerity at the time, by Keith)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-03-21 09:08 by EddieByword.

Keith just said in an interview last week that he talked to Charlie about it, that he didn't wanna tour without him, but that Charlie talked him into it and said the show must go on. So yeah...Charlie gave them permission to do so, go on with Steve instead of him, and that's exactly what they are doing now. And I think they are playing for Charlie up there...Keith said last tour he feels like Charlie is smiling down on them and Mick said it feels cathartic...so let them tour if they want to and it helps them to feel connected to Charlie again and to deal a little better with his loss

I'm just saying that if you've got a band that started 60 years ago, there's bound to be lineup changes. Right?

Our band was founded in 1995. Two of our band members have sadly died, one is terminally ill. Am I not allowed to play concerts with my remaining friends anymore? I don't think so. Everytime we play now we feel that our gone friends are among us although we miss them a lot. But being together and perform helps to deal with it.

Quote
Spodlumt
Wow. Thanks for the schooling! I will now think like all of you. Learned the error of my ways. Will no longer offer a differing viewpoint. The group is the way to go. Critical thinking is very bad.

Wrong conclusion. It's just that:

They are free to do whatever they want at any old time.
You are free to do whatever you want at any old time.

It's still your choice to agree or disagree with them. Nobody's teaching you.

Quote
Spodlumt
Wow. Thanks for the schooling! I will now think like all of you. Learned the error of my ways. Will no longer offer a differing viewpoint. The group is the way to go. Critical thinking is very bad.

Expressing a different viewpoint than you is not schooling.

Being critical to your post is also critical thinking, isn’t it?

There is a thread about Charlie's death already, where thoughts like yours can be expressed.