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

56 minutes ago, foolee said:


I feel like Fred Again / Green Day / Olivia Rodrigo makes more sense. I feel like Eminem does stuff for the money so I can’t see it. 

It does in that system and maybe it's a one of case of olivia willing to do 3 in a row being the second two are the same place. I guess there is also a case she is older now etc etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, MEGABOWL said:

The Rodrigo situation is the main thing that gives me pause on the Green Day dream. She doesn’t seem to have done 3 back to back at any point according to this

Nope she hasn't since the Sour tour where she did it a few times.

 

I'm going to go out on a whim and say she might be willing to do 3 dates now she's a bit older.

 

Fred Again, Green Day, Olivia closing on Sunday. Either that or Green Day aren't there and it's just a convenient gap. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, NorthernSoul52 said:

Yeah, that would have been market saturation to the max. (Though I do wonder if Muse were considered after the kerfuffle with Foo Fighters.)

Probably not, given Dave Grohl fell off that stage in Sweden very close to Glastonbury weekend and Muse would've likely had commitments (one that their fan Wiki says included Werchter, which must've been on the same weekend)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, charlierc said:

It would be super bizarre of Download to have put out social media posts heavily implying Green Day are there for them not to be there.

someone said they did the exact same re MCR last year to be fair

 

but i do agree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, charlierc said:

It would be super bizarre of Download to have put out social media posts heavily implying Green Day are there for them not to be there.

 

20 minutes ago, gfa said:

someone said they did the exact same re MCR last year to be fair

 

but i do agree

I do think Green Day will play Friday Download but if they want to play Glastonbury I don't think any amount of money is stopping them from ticking it off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, NorthernSoul52 said:

Yeah, the MCR baiting is what has a few people stung on Green Day being an absolute lock.

 

But if they've missed out Green Day and a Linkin Park reunion, think there will be understandable disappointment in some quarters.

 

I can't remember the history - could it be it wasn't baiting yet they thought they would play - and something changed - Feels more likely to me? But I do not know the ins and outs.

 

Similarly  maybe KOL thought they would be playing Glastonbury when they put all those images on socials- then things broke down.

 

Got no proof either way so just a theory. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there was an assumption MCR were going to tour in earnest this year, and it never materialised.

 

One of those bands for whom it would be headline or nothing at the G anyway, and I frankly cannot see EE having any interest in them.

 

But also, given their penchant for short shows sometimes - think their WWWY set the other day was very quick - the kind of band who would be a terrific secret slot pick.

 

Not a chance in a month of Sundays, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, charlierc said:

I must've missed their MCR baiting promo material.

 

Even then, the Green Day phrasing saw in their posts a few days ago was as subtle as a brick.

The MCR was just as blatant - something about the black parade

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Ben7amin_ said:

 

I can't remember the history - could it be it wasn't baiting yet they thought they would play - and something changed - Feels more likely to me? But I do not know the ins and outs.

 

Similarly  maybe KOL thought they would be playing Glastonbury when they put all those images on socials- then things broke down.

 

Got no proof either way so just a theory. 

The KOL case has a much simpler explanation if you ask me. Whoever is in charge of social media has a library of archive footage to pull from and they pick a Glastonbury clip. Engagement is really big, partly because of all the speculation it starts. So the social media person keeps posting more clips from Glastonbury because it's their job to increase engagement and followers. 

 

Nothing in the wording ever made it seem like they were teasing an appearance. It always felt more of a push to sell their other dates by reminding people how great their Glastonbury performance was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, VCK2 said:

Maybe Green Day will headline Download, but do a Foos style slot on the Pyramid. I just can't see them headlining both festivals.

That's not unthinkable to be honest, it would make use of the available gap but for an hours set meaning meaning punters still need to go to Download if they want the full thing. Something that I can imagine being a compromise on for both parties and it means Olivia doesn’t do 3 days running. It's not like when Foos did it they weren't a band chasing money either. They would have a day's break, do an hour/hrs 15 set and then only need to get to Luxembourg with a day's rest. Very doable.

 

Something like

 

Olivia

Yungblud

Green Day

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mouserat said:

The KOL case has a much simpler explanation if you ask me. Whoever is in charge of social media has a library of archive footage to pull from and they pick a Glastonbury clip. Engagement is really big, partly because of all the speculation it starts. So the social media person keeps posting more clips from Glastonbury because it's their job to increase engagement and followers. 

 

Nothing in the wording ever made it seem like they were teasing an appearance. It always felt more of a push to sell their other dates by reminding people how great their Glastonbury performance was.

A fair reasoning, at the time it seemed a strong hint but it’s too easy to jump to conclusions 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Ben7amin_ said:

 

I can't remember the history - could it be it wasn't baiting yet they thought they would play - and something changed - Feels more likely to me? But I do not know the ins and outs.

 

Similarly  maybe KOL thought they would be playing Glastonbury when they put all those images on socials- then things broke down.

 

Got no proof either way so just a theory. 


THE POST did say something about them being in talks

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...