Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

2013 Headliners


Guest shangri-la_steward

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 11.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I kind of agree although having got beyond the utterly dire headliners and the acts mentioned on the front page of efests I can see a number of acts there that I'd like to pop up at Glasto somewhere. I think Neil has deliberately chosen the blandest acts to put on the sub-headline to wind people up a bit more than KoL and Beyonce already would have done!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm 50/50 on Wham.

I didn't/don't care much for their output, it's pure-pop, which is fine, just not my thing. If they did play on Sunday I would be forced to watch it, as my Mrs. 40th birthday on 30/Jun, and she would LOVE that!

So, not bothered for me, would be nice for the Mrs. though, but I would be forced to watch them...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

what I've heard might be a pisstake from that, but it might not be either.

Matey who sent me the Wham thing definitely gets his hands on good info - tho unfortunately not everything he gets is good (there's a reason for why, I can't go into details).

I'm inclined to think it's not right, but because I know the source does get good info I can't exclude it entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Everything she wants" and "Edge of Heaven" are tunes, but to think they could headline with just Wham tracks is (i suspect) Neil trolling the bottom feeders at The S*n again.

George himself could probably play his own stuff to bolster the set but to think that they can maintain the attention of 80K with "Wham Rap" and "Young Guns" isnt reasonable.

Yourself and Scotty up there doing Cliff tracks is more likely Neil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
I can't for the life of me understand how and why Wham would be headliners, maybe I'm too young to get it. Always considered them popular but not that popular.

Wham perhaps weren't that big, but within minutes of Wham splitting George Michael was the biggest act in the world.

I can't really see Wham @ Glasto happening, and I'd say in normal circumstances a reformed Wham probably wouldn't get a sniff of headlining Glasto, but as a back-up for the stones or playing before them as a one-off show I can't quite see as impossible.

For all we know, Emily might have seen that Mirror story last summer and noticed that the date fell in the middle of Glasto and then thought "we could do that...".

As I say I don't really put much faith in what's been said to me, but even so I can't dismiss it entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
"Everything she wants" and "Edge of Heaven" are tunes, but to think they could headline with just Wham tracks is (i suspect) Neil trolling the bottom feeders at The S*n again.

George himself could probably play his own stuff to bolster the set but to think that they can maintain the attention of 80K with "Wham Rap" and "Young Guns" isnt reasonable.

Yourself and Scotty up there doing Cliff tracks is more likely Neil.

As I say, I don't put much faith (ha!, see what i did there? :P) in it, but I can't dismiss it entirely.

Who knows, perhaps it'd be a George Michael set with a cameo of some Wham stuff in the middle of it?

I've merely passed on what someone has said to me - and he's far from sure about it himself - but it's very definitely the case that he gets good info (but not all the time).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

This sounds more reasonable. But George Michael followed by the Stones (!) on that Pyramid = 100K+ and you and I know that aint happening.

whoever it is before the stones, I guarantee they'll be a crowd-shifting act - there's no chance it'll be an act that'll keep most of the same crowd for both sets.

While I don't put much credence in what I've been sent, I've got more confidence in it right now than I did when I first read the email. It's either a great wind-up by someone with a very good memory, or there's something to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • Restore getting more than Lib Dems is not good.
    • https://x.com/amirtibon/status/2083054470871535853   Some thoughts on the Gaza agreement announced overnight, which despite my reservations and concerns, I hope will be implemented. 1. Donald Trump is trying to collect "wins" and "achievements" ahead of the midterm elections. His party is entering that election at a disadvantage, but because Democrats may choose weak and unpopular candidates in specific states, much like Republicans did in 2022, there's a reason for Trump to at least try achieving a surprising result like the one Biden secured four years ago.   2. The will to provide Trump such a "win" was an important motivation for all sides involved in this agreement: Hamas, Netanyahu, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Turkey. All of them hope, each for their own reasons, that the transactional president will remember their role in the agreement and the positive media coverage it has generated and will continue to generate. You can like it or not, but that's the nature of diplomacy, especially in the Middle East, under Trump.   3. Netanyahu and his band of liars in the Israeli media (and the last few suckers in the American media still buying his spin) are already trying to oversell the agreement and present it in terms that contradict the Board of Peace statements and briefings. Of course, the October 7 Prime Minister can't just say the truth on this one, which goes something like: "I'm trying to stay on good terms with Trump ahead of an election here in Israel that will determine my personal fate and whether or not I go to jail in 2027."   4. For Hamas, the agreement is a way to buy time and survive, which is basically the organization's overarching goal since October 7. They lost most of their leadership and thousands of their fighters; they will also, I believe, give up some of their weapons to the new Gaza-based Palestinian government, which is a good thing. But at the bottom of all their decisions is a simple calculation: being able to say, "we committed the most deadly and humiliating attack against Israel since the start of the conflict, and survived as a movement and an organization to tell about it."   5. Hamas was able to say that yesterday, before the agreement was signed, and it can also say that today, after the conclusion of the negotiations. So in that regard, the agreement is preferable to the murky post-war reality that preceded it, in which Hamas was recruiting again thousands of young fighters, holding on to all its weapons, and controlling 99% of Gaza's population, making money off people buying fuel and cigarettes. Changing even a part of that terrible reality, by collecting some of the weapons and allowing progress on reconstruction under a non-Hamas government, is better. It means coming to terms with the fact that Israel under this government failed to dismantle Hamas and allowed its survival even before this agreement was signed.   6. Do I think the agreement will be fully implemented over the next 300 days, as I understand the timeline? I'm highly skeptical. But I'm also asking: what are the alternatives? Netanyahu, in his quest for political survival at all costs, ignored David Ben-Gurion's national security strategy of seeking short and decisive wars, which was based on Israel's unique internal and external challenges that make it dangerous for this country to have long wars of attrition. The result is an Israel that is hated, isolated and denounced around the world like never before, and is totally reliant on the support of one man (TRUMP) to avoid crushing international sanctions. Going to war in Gaza once again based on the same promise of "finishing Hamas," which this government failed to achieve after three long years, would have been suicidal unless Trump promised his full backing. And Trump, for good reasons, can't give such a commitment after his bitter experience with Netanyahu in Iran and Lebanon.   7. For me and my family, these are all very personal, not only political, questions. My six-year-old daughter will start school on the Gaza border in exactly one month, as we rebuild our life in the same home where Hamas tried to murder us on October 7. We've learned over the years to be highly skeptical of premature victory announcements and diplomatic celebrations. When these things collapse under the cynical realities of the conflict, most of those announcing them are not around to face the consequences. Still, I don't see a better alternative to the 20-Point Plan that Trump presented last year, at least not with Israel's current position of isolation and exhaustion under this government. So I have some hope that the agreement will succeed, even partially, and deliver a period of quiet. For us on the border, that would be significant after three years of war and trauma. And maybe in the long run, with different Israeli and Palestinian leadership, this will become a first step in a broader positive change for the region.
    • Until they're through the first round of votes there's no point believing any reports about who'll win.
    • David Byrne’s obviously got a few hits to play, but he’s not cheesy enough for the Legend Slot. Other headliner perhaps?
    • Too good for the legends slot 
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...