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 😎

2025 Headliners


Guest

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, SomeoneListeningIn said:

Why on earth would Biffy have been given the top slot over Ed Sheeran in 2017?

Dave isn't subbing this year.

Dave, Rihanna and Fender is possible, yes, but it looks to me like a T in the Park lineup if that was still going nowadays. I'm starting to think they'll have one of Dave or Fender, with the other being booked for 2026.

I don't see what Ed really has to do with it, he could have not been been and Biffy got given the slot. All I said what, Biffy should have done it that year.

That is a case of where we don't deny the direction Glastonbury is going into though.

If Dave and Fender are both back then, one of them is going to miss out in that case until the next album cycle as neither are doing it on their second year. For a festival trying to be diverse and include everything....those 3 fit fairly well. I don't see Dave and Fender as the same act, I would be elsewhere personally. It's definitely a year I'd say I'm out

52 minutes ago, Superscally said:

Because they're good and Ed Sheeran is bobbins. 

Were*^ 😜

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, northernangel said:

I don't see what Ed really has to do with it, he could have not been been and Biffy got given the slot. All I said what, Biffy should have done it that year.

No, you said Biffy should have done it the year Ed Sheeran did. Besides, they wouldn't have headlined over Radiohead or Foos either. They were past it in 2017 anyway, their only chance would have been in 2013 at a push.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, SomeoneListeningIn said:

No, you said Biffy should have done it the year Ed Sheeran did. Besides, they wouldn't have headlined over Radiohead or Foos either. They were past it in 2017 anyway, their only chance would have been in 2013 at a push.

They were fantastic at Leeds in 2013 tbf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SomeoneListeningIn said:

No, you said Biffy should have done it the year Ed Sheeran did. Besides, they wouldn't have headlined over Radiohead or Foos either. They were past it in 2017 anyway, their only chance would have been in 2013 at a push.

Yes, that means, that was the year Biffy Clyro for me had their final chance to do it as with the way their sound was going, they would get away with it at Glastonbury, Ed would have had plenty of time to play it still and it was poor. They played in 07, 08, 10, and 11, so had a break to play the other festival. Why they played IOW both in 12 and 14 god knows though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, SomeoneListeningIn said:

Also Biffy Clyro aren't that good

Biffy are incredible musicians - seriously, seriously top level, with a solid catalogue and great live energy. Personally think they're a step below being chosen for the top spot (like a lot of bands), but would do a great job if they did get picked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Superscally said:

Biffy are incredible musicians - seriously, seriously top level, with a solid catalogue and great live energy. Personally think they're a step below being chosen for the top spot (like a lot of bands), but would do a great job if they did get picked.

They are but pull wise now unfortunately, the time has passed. They’ve done a special guest slot too and Victorious is only a sign of downward trajectory. It is 60k but none of the acts there are going to headline Glastonbury. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, northernangel said:

They are but pull wise now unfortunately, the time has passed. They’ve done a special guest slot too and Victorious is only a sign of downward trajectory. It is 60k but none of the acts there are going to headline Glastonbury. 

Sad but true...

Would need an "event" to reverse that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Superscally said:

Sad but true...

Would need an "event" to reverse that

Well since 2016 and including they've released 3 sunpar albums that aren't even getting them a go at their own small outdoor show, I also take on board they might not want this. Even look at Korn, different genre, a more niche if you like even are even doing Gunnersbury Park. Biffy will get Scotland for obvious reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, northernangel said:

Well since 2016 and including they've released 3 sunpar albums that aren't even getting them a go at their own small outdoor show, I also take on board they might not want this. Even look at Korn, different genre, a more niche if you like even are even doing Gunnersbury Park. Biffy will get Scotland for obvious reasons.

My mate lives next door to their roadie...might see what plans are...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/7/2024 at 10:00 AM, northernangel said:

Biffy Clyro should have done it the year Ed Sheeram did.

If they had been active in 2015, they probably should have got the call to step in for Foo Fighters that year. Love me Biffy Clyro, and they were a massive sub when they played in 2017. But stock has been in decline ever since Ellipsis stuttered in 2016.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, NorthernSoul52 said:

If they had been active in 2015, they probably should have got the call to step in for Foo Fighters that year. Love me Biffy Clyro, and they were a massive sub when they played in 2017. But stock has been in decline ever since Ellipsis stuttered in 2016.

It's an interesting "what if", but they wouldn't have got the call to step in for the Foo Fighters.

When Flo was booked to sub, there were plenty of people suggesting that she was already big enough to headline outright and as a new female artist should have been given the chance to step up (albeit more specifically instead of The Who rather than FF). For the Festival to lose a headliner a few weeks out and not give her that spot would've been something of a statement, and one that they had no desire to make.

The only way an active Biffy Clyro would have got that call would be if had happened on a different day, and the logistics didn't allow Flo to take the slot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NorthernSoul52 said:

If they had been active in 2015, they probably should have got the call to step in for Foo Fighters that year. Love me Biffy Clyro, and they were a massive sub when they played in 2017. But stock has been in decline ever since Ellipsis stuttered in 2016.

Yes I'd probably agree with that. Given the amount of times they'd played Glastonbury, a step in wouldn't have mattered the same. Yes, there is probably two songs off of the combined last 3 albums of Biffy Clyro that I feel are worth bothering with, and Animal Style is the one I would pick by some distance.

2 hours ago, Hugh Jass II said:

Sheeran was (and probably still is) one of the biggest acts on the planet when he headlined in 17.

Foos and Radiohead both substantially bigger (and better) than Biffy too.

They are both substantially bigger than Stormzy as well and there is no one saying about a problem with him having done it.

Edited by northernangel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, northernangel said:

Yes I'd probably agree with that. Given the amount of times they'd played Glastonbury, a step in wouldn't have mattered the same. Yes, there is probably two songs off of the combined last 3 albums of Biffy Clyro that I feel are worth bothering with, and Animal Style is the one I would pick by some distance.

They are both substantially bigger than Stormzy as well and there is no one saying about a problem with him having done it.

Stormzy was the face of an entire movement when he was booked.

Biffy Clyro are the face of very little.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got me thinking - what would a 2015 headline set have looked like?

1 Different People
2 That Golden Rule
3 Who’s Got a Match?
4 57
5 Biblical
6 Justboy
7 Folding Stars
8 Bubbles
9 God and Satan
10 Machines
11 The Captain
12 There’s No Such Thing as a Jaggy Snake
13 Living is a Problem Because Everything Dies
14 Glitter and Trauma
15 Black Chandelier
16 Mountains

17 Many of Horror
18 Stingin’ Belle

That's... robust. That's very robust, though I do say that with bias.

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

    • Is anything said we need to be aware of?
    • Just listened to the new Madonna album, it would be a catastrophe if that isn't played on the pyramid!
    • 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.
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...