NJS

Two decent ones signed by Keegan, 4 bottleless shits signed by Wise/Vetere/Jiminez.

I would love it if the cunt was jailed...... SD/JJB Fraud enqury

I think "cool" was the wrong word - I meant that it was almost a given that you like The Beatles.

As I understand it, there were a number of "similar" bands about at the start of the 60s and The Beatles were just the best/most popular. Now it may be that that popularity was the driving force of a musical revolution but I think the existence of other bands suggests that their place was more as the vanguard for what was happening at a broad grassroots level rather than as the be all and end all. I think you also have to look at the cultural changes happening at the time which were integral in change in society which in someway demanded "revolutionary" music which I'd say had evolved from pure rock and roll. I'd also add that invoking the articles CT posted and also Fish's suggestion above there is a tendency to go with the flow and be "cool" in liking The Beatles which has an Emperors new clothes type context - it can sometimes be seen as heresy almost to say you don't like them.

I admit to being an argumentative git but the positions I do take on this and other things are all genuine. I would however confess that my position on The Beatles is "influenced" by my brother being a huge, huge fan of theirs. Something that at least means I can argue from a position of knowledge when it comes to their music as I have heard it all.

Pure music snobbery there NJS. I don't think its helpful or true to categorise people like that either. Probably but I'll bet if you asked people who bought 10 or less albums a year what they are I could give a pretty good guess as to what they would be. I'd also add that its evidenced by the number of people who "grow out" of music and have an overstated sense of nostalgia for what was popular when they were interested in it because they haven't bought anything since.

I have no issue acknowledging those points (though I'm unsure if the first one is proven) - being honest I don't really underestimate their influence either - as CT has said I just think their actual music is overrated.

As an admitted outsider to disco/dance/soul I lumped them together more from a group that was meant to be killed as was the case with prog rock as you say. Of course "good" music can be popular and "manufactured shite" can occasionally be enjoyable - I was just talking in general terms. Again admitting bias I think the ubiqutous "Beatles or Stones?" question I always saw as an establishment versus outsider thing which would make me lean towards the latter even though I don't really like either. I mention this as a possible explanation for my antipathy.

Its strange you say that, at 43 I am the youngest of 7 so there was all sorts of music being played and lying around the house from my older brothers and sisters but I cant really remember any Beatles stuff. You're not one of them then. Imo, to appreciate a musical revolution you have to have not heard any music that came after it or is a derivative style before listening to it. The only way to fulfil that criteria is either to have spent your life listening to music pre-1962 and then at the age of 17/18 listen to the Beatles for the first time. Impossible if you have a radio or TV. When my dad (a professional musician) talks about listening to The Beatles for the first time, he talks about the first moment he heard it and the difference to anything he had heard before. His love for them comes from this moment, one which you can not re-create for later generations. I was old enough to see punk supposedly revolutionalise music but it was all exaggerated despite the enthusiasm of the fans - punk was supposed to kill disco/dance music but the 70s ended ruled by garbage like the Bee Gees and Michael Jackson - just like now the charts are still dominated by populist shite. Music to me is always divided between stuff that "proper" music fans - people who take it seriously - like and stuff bought by and listened to by more casual listeners who are often influenced just by the notion of popularity. I've always considered The Beatles to be on the latter side of the divide.

Watch the footage of any of their gigs from 60-66 and you will see absolutely nothing else but screaming, tearful teenage girls - exactly like any "Take That" type band since. Maybe their later music would have given rise to gigs with more "serious" fans but we'll never know. But that was a first though wasn't it? Regardless of latter fanbase, for me their later stuff vindicates their talent, in particular John Lennon. Whose solo stuff was dross.

There were many band who started/came to prominence in the early 60s who could be said to have influenced what came later - I don't see any Beatles influence in metal/heavy rock for instance which if anything arose "in opposition" to the Beatles. They get the plaudits beacuse of the level of success/popularity which is probably fair enough and I recognise that a lot of stuff I like could be said to have been influenced by them but I think that influence is more diffuse than just "I grew up listening to The Beatles and The Beatles alone".

Watch the footage of any of their gigs from 60-66 and you will see absolutely nothing else but screaming, tearful teenage girls - exactly like any "Take That" type band since. Maybe their later music would have given rise to gigs with more "serious" fans but we'll never know.

You might not like them but to claim they are somehow overrated is ridiculous. I've read people defending the inclusion of "When I'm 64" on Sgt Peppers as me not recognising their profound sense of irony. They may have done a lot for the music business but I still think their music itself is vastly overrated.

There was a valid-ish argument about the training camps but the way they just thought change the regime and everything wil be okay was staggeringly stupid - I only have an 'O' level in history and knew that was bollocks so I find the level of imcomptence amazing.

I just couldn't see any british PM not backing them to the hilt - though Blair's zeal was especially distasteful. I think calls for them to be charged with war crimes are probably over the top but then again when they both come out with the God told me to do it/I'll be judged by God bullshit I think they'd deserve it and more.

I remember Bush's first response was to go to congress and ask for $260bn to pay for the initial Afghanistan invasion - I thought at the time what if they spend that on just alleviating poverty in the third world? - would it have been a better long term strategy leading to a more secure world (as the US would be hated less).

Didn't the number of BNP votes at the Euro elections actually go down compared with the previous one? I think they won seats because the Labour vote collapsed.

When we played in Belgrade in 98, we were taken to a night club by a bloke we'd met which had a cloakroom type check-in facility for guns - scary in hindsight but it seemed "cool" at the time. The bloke was the bouncer at a pub (actually a bingo club) we'd gone to one night but it turned out he was also a bodyguard for the local gangsters.

Not a thing as such but I remember defining what I wanted out of life about 10 years ago when U2 announced a gig with Oasis as support in San Francisco and I remember thinking I wish I had the means/opportunity to just say "fuck it" and jump on a plane and go. I guess it was the idea of having the freedom to do something "daft" without worrying about consequences which appealed.

I'll be going but I need to find out if any of my mates are going first - if you don't mind being a backup I'd be game. Will know by the end of the week.

I've contemplated setting up a gattling gun type thing on the balcony of Liverpool St station and mowing down hundreds of commuters from time to time.

I think a couple of people on here have made that point and I agree - you could add in the french who despite some success (Robert/Ginola) "suffer" the same problems.

"What exactly has Denis Wise done wrong?"[/N-O Collaborator]

Was it just my imagination or was there a suggestion around the time they named the leazes end after SJH that the East Stand would be named after Shepherd? I think they called it the "Charles Shepherd" stand after his Dad.

When I started going as a kid with my Dad and Brother we'd usually go in the Leazes end - the biggest cheer I've ever heard at SJP was when we played Leeds on Boxing day 73 and there was a full house and the tannoy announced at about ten to three that the Leazes end was full. When I started going with mates in 78 the Leazes had just come down - we used to go in the Gallowgate where I went until about 80 or 81 - then I spent another couple of years in the Leazes as standing next to the away fans was just about the only entertainment going. I watched Keegan's debut from the Leazes but by the end of that season we'd migrated to the old stand paddock. In 83 we bought STs for the East stand (Leazes wing) where we remained until 91 when we moved to the new Milburn. We got kicked up to Level 7 when it was extended. Spiritually I'd still say Leazes.