As a follow up to Glass Slide's post that he says Mick has wanted Ronnie out of the band for years, that Ronnie has been forced to stay in a different hotel...
I've also read posts that their friendship has deteriorated and at one point Mick was barely speaking to Ronnie.
It cannot be easy for Ronnie, all the more that fans tend to be so hard on him.

Did anyone notice in the Rio gig, Ronnie at one point gave MJ a bit of a "look" then pointed his finger in the air mimic-ing Mick. Notice
Ronnie flirted with the camera standing slightly behind Mick, and Mick
turned to him to see what he was doing...LoL. It seemed Ronnie was hanging back behind Mick for the show, so Mick would be front and center.

Mr. Wood spends too much time posturing/mugging as opposed to serious guitar playing, which is a shame.

No one can beat Mick when it comes to being the center of attention/master of the "Performance."

How dull would that be, if all, except for Mick, where nailed to the stage like Bill Wyman.
I like Ronnie very much, as he is



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-02-21 00:49 by open-g.

It simply isn't true that Mick has tried for years to fire Ronnie or forced him to stay in a different hotel. Their friendship has never been deteriorated .Mick has always supported Ronnie, and he probably still is his strongest supporter in the band. And Ronnie mimicking Mick and making funny gestures when standing behind him is really nothing new or rare. You can see this at almost every show.

Ronnie makes the shows fun to watch. Even Keith has gotten pretty mellow on stage over the years. Just like Mick, Ronnie has lots of energy, still able to jump and run around. He looked great, sober and confident and watching his antics with Mick is great. You could tell Mick was happy with Ronnie in Rio.

Simply is not true---really--please read the following:

Keith Richards--biography--by Victor Bockris (great read btw)

Pg 327

"Jagger wanted him out of the altogether and whenever possible, forced him to stay in different quarters from the rest of the group--even the roadies. According to insiders, George Thorogood was secretly rehearsing to take his place.

I have many other EMPIRICAL references from other sources to support the same proposition.

Now, wahwahwoody--what is your source for saying the above "simply isn't true"
Curious to see where you get that bit of inaccurate information from.

Btw--Keith was and is Ronnie's closest ally--if not for Keith Ronie would not be in the band today.

Glass Side, this is from the '81/'82 tour. That's 24 years ago!!!

Cheers,
Wuudy

Wahwahwoody--here is another reference for you Keith Richards by Chris Sanford

pg 257

"Keith also put himself in charge of Woody, telling him bluntly not to f--- up on tour. For the next two or three years, there were constant rumors that the Stones would hire another guitarist. Behind the scenes, Richards and Jagger quietly made arrangements to audition George Thorogood."

"When Wood discovered this, he locked himself up with his girlfriend and freebase kit."

When was that, then? And if KR is his buddy why was he involved with Jagger in making arrangements to audition Thorogood?

I thought Ronnie actually played quite well overall. I was very suprised. Sure he butchered the occasional solo (I'm still trying to get one particular "cat-strangler" out of my mind) but otherwise he actually added to the music which is pretty rare these days. What really bummed me out was the virtually complete lack of mugging and clowning around that makes Ronnie Ronnie. This was the perfect opportunity (1 million concert-attendees) to really ham it up and give the crowd a show. But no. Nothing. What's up with that?

Wuudy--I was simply responding to the fiction that was wahwahwoody's post.

Actually his playing in '81, while not as good imo as the '75-'78 period is better then it is now.

Glass Slide Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Wuudy--I was simply responding to the fiction
> that was wahwahwoody's post.
>
> Actually his playing in '81, while not as good imo
> as the '75-'78 period is better then it is now.


I would hope so! He was 32 years old then! Charlie was better then too, so was Keith! Mich actually might have improved??!??!

simply isn't true, witness the walk on appearance by Mick at Ronnie's gig in London last spring 2005.

I actually like Keith's playing alot on this tour--while we could argue about the abilities of different members of the band. Some may feel that they do not sound as good as they did back then and that could be difficult to argue.

The difference is this--Ronnie is a shell of what he once was. As someone else wrote, at this point he gets cheered simply for not completely F---ing up. A bit harsh, perhaps, but the point is well taken.

Now, what other member of the band do you feel that way about?

I thought Ronnie played fine in Rio. So did Keith. Sure, they aren't what they used to be but they did a fine job. I have to say though that I think Mick and Charlie have only gotten better over the years.

From what i've always understood, the issue with possibly hiring George T. to take ronnie's place was due to his physical condition (coke abuse) during the 1981 tour....George opened up for quite a few shows...i saw him do two myself...and it was rumored if ronnie couldn't get his act together before long, that george would fill the spot....just my recollection from quite a few years ago....the part about jagger forcing him to stay in other hotels (victor's book) might even stem from a method of him getting ronnie to wake up to the reality of it all....just my opinion

Igottheblues Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> simply isn't true, witness the walk on appearance
> by Mick at Ronnie's gig in London last spring
> 2005.


Ok, so based on a single appearance you eliminate the accuarcy
of three different books? Seems kind of thin.

Uh, anything empirical other then your own feelings (wishes?) to base this on?

jhat111---one of those books also said that at one point the band paid him 500k to stop freebasing and when he did not--Mick went ballistic.

The bit about the hotels, may have been that and I if I remember correctly also b/cMick was afraid of a bust--especially given the amount of $$$ involved.

man, BV must really be locked in on the Olympics for this thread to get this far! Go Norway!!!!

It was Ronnie's coke abuse that led to that sitaution of seperation on tour. I had never read it included hotels, but that it did include transportation, and I have no idea how valid either is. MJ was evry concerned not only for the band sound, but for a repeat of what had happend to Keith a few years before in Toronto. Basically Mick was terrified of another huge drug bust! And Ron's playing in 81 was almost universillay acclaimed, which in light of his crack problem, I stand in awe. This was a younger Mick and Keith. This was the same Mick and Keith that fired Brain; the same Mick that if you believe all accounts considered replacing Keith with MR Wood during the Toronto affair. This is an era where there was no Betty Ford center, rehab was in its earliest beginning.

But make no mistake Glass Slider...all of your sources are more than two decades old. Ronnie's problem back then was a severe crack addiction...AND HE HAS BEAT IT.

Now he works every day on his alcoholism...with the encouragement of MJ. MJ has visited him while in rehab, MJ is now his BIGGEST encouragement to stick it out. Please don't let your perosnal distaste of the man's playing obscure the fact that the world is a much differnt place than it was in 1981, and so are Mrs. Jaggers and Richards. Ronnie has now played with the group longer than Bill did, or close to it. That is over 30 years of FREINDSHIP and playing with the band now, as compared to 6 years of playing with the band in 1981. Mick and Keith have thior limits, I am sure, but MJ does support Ronnie.

So in the end I agree with what you say as be3ing valid IN THE CONTEXT OF TIME. I have read all the same quotes as you. But so much as changed. Go back far enough and you will see Jagger seriously stating that he could not imagine himself singing Satisfaction at age 30. Will you hold that quote up as Gospel also?

well sayed kahoosier - phew, what a relief

"The satisfaction" quote was said to the press for public consumption.

Kind of different.

something like this?

Wow--cool picture--gotta love the shades.

But to answer the question, yes.

During The Ed Bradley - 60 Minutes LICKS interview, Ronnie was asked if he was given an ultimatum by Mick to either clean up or your not touring with us. Ronnie responded with "It was more of a plee from a friend to staighten up or you're not going to make it" According to Ronnie, Mick was more concerned about probably killing himself eventually and losing a friend than losing a business partner. Does anybody remeber this interview?

I love Keith's playing. Yes, it was better back in the seventies, but I still think he really rocks. Ronnie is just so damn inconsistent that it's troubling. I mean sometimes I wonder how he got to be in THE GREATEST RNR BAND. Why is he so damn low in the mix most nights?

WNY Stones Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> During The Ed Bradley - 60 Minutes LICKS
> interview, Ronnie was asked if he was given an
> ultimatum by Mick to either clean up or your not
> touring with us. Ronnie responded with "It was
> more of a plee from a friend to staighten up or
> you're not going to make it" According to Ronnie,
> Mick was more concerned about probably killing
> himself eventually and losing a friend than losing
> a business partner. Does anybody remeber this
> interview?


Ok--so this was going on much further along then '81-'82.
Good for Mick for taking the soft sell--the underlying point
remains.

very simple, if they wanted him out he would be out, he is still there, case closed



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-02-21 04:55 by melillo.

>> I have many other EMPIRICAL references from other sources to support the same proposition. <<

and so you've noticed all the EMPIRICAL evidence that the books you've quoted here are laden with factual errors copied from one another
(cf the complete fiction about what happened at the 82 Wembley show, just as one example).
you've also of course noticed that the quotes you've chosen specifically state that the authors are repeating hearsay and rumours.
anyway: "empirical" means "based on observation/experience", not "based on rumours repeated in some books i have".
as Melilo notes, what we can observe/experience is: Ronnie is one of the Rolling Stones.


"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-02-21 12:31 by with sssoul.

deuce Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I thought Ronnie played fine in Rio. So did Keith.
> Sure, they aren't what they used to be but they
> did a fine job. I have to say though that I think
> Mick and Charlie have only gotten better over the
> years.

All this stuff about Keith and Ronnie being "shells" of their former selves is such rot...

They never played better together than Forty Licks and that was like 3 years ago.

There's this assumption that they coulnd't possibly play as well today as they did in the 70's because they are older... that's just rubbish.

In his own way Jagger is as good this tour as ever, so is Charlie only 1 year after cancer surgery...

I don't think that Keith or Ronnie are quite up to their 40 Licks level, but they're playing okay and occasionally brilliant this tour.




"It's just that demon life has got me in it's sway..."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-02-21 09:46 by BornOnTheBayou.

BotB: are you deaf, never listened to any soundboard bootleg from the 78 or 81 tour? This is the period when Keith and Ronnie as a team peaked.
During the Licks tour, and this tour again, both are just mediocre on a good night and far below standard on an regular night.
Listen to some good sounding boots like Houston, Memphis, SF, H.Bowl for reference.
Although louder in the mix than during the LIcks tour, they are whether off tune or just ragging their guitars and both of them can hardy even play a brief solo anymore. it's Mick and Charly keeping the band together.