Fenway Park, Boston, 2 nights Summer 2006

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
:yikes:

That pic of the Bruce show reminds me of why I dislike stadium shows so intensely. Ants on stage. :no:


This is all just a rumor. We've been through this before.

The "new album" isn't even a rumor; it's just wishful thinking taken from Bono's ramblings.
 
martha said:
:yikes:

That pic of the Bruce show reminds me of why I dislike stadium shows so intensely. Ants on stage. :no:


This is all just a rumor. We've been through this before.

The "new album" isn't even a rumor; it's just wishful thinking taken from Bono's ramblings.

martha, my dear...I don't know that it is such ramblings...even Mr. Clayton has been insinuating that this could happen...but I sorta agree with you that we've been through this before. I can't completely defy you..you're my favorite.
 
As did Edge and Lillywhite. Besides, 3 legs to promote one album?

I'm thinking we will get new material if they get back to US and Europe next year.
 
martha said:
:yikes:

That pic of the Bruce show reminds me of why I dislike stadium shows so intensely. Ants on stage. :no:

Well, the pic makes it look farther away than it is. Granted, from the stands it won't be exactly close, but we're talking Fenway Park here. It's not that big. Some of those seats in the stands would be like seeing U2 at the Fleet Center (or whatever the hell they call it now).
 
I find that empty baseball diamond to be extremely bizarre. It just looks completely wrong for a rock concert set up. Weirdest thing I've seen in ages, talk about a total disconnect between the stage/floor and the stands.
 
thetitans2k said:
All I can say is, Come to the god damn Winnipeg Stadium, you bastards.

Oh yeah...they'll come running with that kind of welcome.

Winnipeg: Drive two blocks down to Siberia and make a left at the North Pole and that pretty much describes the neighborhood that this city is in :)
 
Well, here's the stage... can you say 'fugly'.

Love U2's compared to this bird's nest...

20050818e.jpg
 
I have a friend who works at Fenway (got me free seats when Bruce was there) and he told me, as of now there is no reason to believe there will be a U2 show.

He says they have talked, but both sides are far off on many issues (money, etc).

He also said, the Rolling Stones has been such a hassle (and its messing up the field big time) that he sincerely doubts that they will let another big act like U2 (with there stage) have a show there.

I hope it happens, but as of now, just a rumor.

If it doesn't happen, blame Mick and the boys. Bastards!
 
That's a shame...though it's not like U2's stage setup is anywhere near the monstrosity that the Stones setup is.

Guess we'll just wait and see. It is a year away, after all...Maybe it'll work out some other time. I would love to see them at Fenway some day.
 
clerks said:
I have a friend who works at Fenway (got me free seats when Bruce was there) and he told me, as of now there is no reason to believe there will be a U2 show.

He says they have talked, but both sides are far off on many issues (money, etc).

He also said, the Rolling Stones has been such a hassle (and its messing up the field big time) that he sincerely doubts that they will let another big act like U2 (with there stage) have a show there.

I hope it happens, but as of now, just a rumor.

If it doesn't happen, blame Mick and the boys. Bastards!

I agree with most of what you're saying here. It seems logical that the Stones' show last night wasn't too spectacular, with the girl falling off the top of the right field wall overshadowing the actual concert that was going on. The field didn't seem to be in good shape, either.

Although it's not like the Vertigo stage is that parking garage that showed up in center field last night in Fenway.

In my honest opinion, the Stones are a little too old and are trying too hard. I know they've only played 1 gig (their 2nd is tomorrow night, also at Fenway) on this tour thus far, but give me a break! I think U2 is more sensible and will realize they may have to downsize their current stage a bit (possibly remove the circular-like playing area and keep the elipse formation) to a-fit more people and b-improve the sound quality on the field.
 
NHChris said:
The Boston Globe thought Dan Rather's story about Bush was about as iron-clad factual as you can get. So there you go.

But taking this particular story as true, it seems plausible that U2 would sew up the Fenway dates ASAP...long before Major league Baseball gets around to scheduling the Boston Red Sox. They'd have to build the schedule around U2's dates at Fenway. And that, by extension, impacts the scheduling of all other American League teams.

There's power for you: U2 rules Major League Baseball.

I think even the Sox trump U2 when it comes to home field advantage. MLB will not, nor do I think they've ever, planned their schedule around anything other than.... baseball games.

The schedule for next year is probably already drafted, if U2 IS to play there, they'll pick some rough open dates and shoot for those.
 
martha said:
:yikes:

That pic of the Bruce show reminds me of why I dislike stadium shows so intensely. Ants on stage. :no:


This is all just a rumor. We've been through this before.

The "new album" isn't even a rumor; it's just wishful thinking taken from Bono's ramblings.

wow, you don't know what you're missing!
 
phanan said:


Well, the pic makes it look farther away than it is. Granted, from the stands it won't be exactly close, but we're talking Fenway Park here. It's not that big. Some of those seats in the stands would be like seeing U2 at the Fleet Center (or whatever the hell they call it now).

That is correct, Fenway is the smallest park in Major League Baseball I believe..
 
Either Fenway or Chicago's Wrigley Field is smallest, but I'm not sure which. Including standing room, Fenway seats about 35,400 for baseball.
 
Ifeelnumb84 said:
Either Fenway or Chicago's Wrigley Field is smallest, but I'm not sure which. Including standing room, Fenway seats about 35,400 for baseball.

Fenway is the smallest in the majors.

Fenway Capacity is 36,000 (and some change)

Wrigley Field is about 38,000 give or take.
 
martha said:


Trust me, I do.


I saw 10 arena shows and 5 stadium shows in the first two legs of this tour. The stadium shows crapped all over the indoor ones in every way. U2 is something else in front of 100,000 people.
 
Last edited:
Excuse me, but english is not my native tongue: When you say "crapped all over", I think about vomit.
What I'm trying to say is: Did you prefer indoor or outdoor?
 
phanan said:


Well, the pic makes it look farther away than it is. Granted, from the stands it won't be exactly close, but we're talking Fenway Park here. It's not that big. Some of those seats in the stands would be like seeing U2 at the Fleet Center (or whatever the hell they call it now).
Thats a stretch, the closest seats in the stands for the Fenway shows are very far away from the stage as the seating fans out in the outfield. Though Fenway is a small baseball field, I'd venture to say that seating at a football stadium has its advantages over Fenway cause the width of he field is a bit less where the stage sets. If there were ever (and there isn't) a way to have the stage in the infield where the seating is closer, it would give the show a lot more intimate feeling. I saw the Stones last night and Bruce in 2003, as I said then, the only seats worth anything at Fenway for a concert are on the field, and many of them are still too far away.
 
pulle28 said:
Excuse me, but english is not my native tongue: When you say "crapped all over", I think about vomit.
What I'm trying to say is: Did you prefer indoor or outdoor?

he is saying the outdoor show is a lot better than the indoor show
 
Back
Top Bottom