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.
Diane L said:


My only warning to people who would want to see them at Fenway is that the seats are very uncomfortable if you have hips...I'm a big girl and I was hurting the last time I saw a game there!

The difference though would be you'd never sit down with U2 there.

:wink:
 
A 3-legged tour, in one country, to promote one album? This calls for a new album, don't ya think?
 
The same rumor came out last year. People were talking about U2 performing at Fenway in late August 2005. Instead, the Stones are here this week. I wouldn't count on this, but I suppose it's possible. If Steve Morse from the Boston Globe reports it, then I'd start to believe it. I don't know who these other writers are.

Also, a buddy of mine from ClearChannel (concert booking in Boston) knows I love U2 and he hasn't mentioned a thing about this. File this under Wait & See.
 
Ifeelnumb84 said:
Here's my prediction:
Jan '06: in the studio
Late Jan - Feb: Austrailia, Japan
March: South America/Mexico
April-early June: Europe
June-July: finish new album
first week of August: release of How to Dismantle All the Bombs You Can't Leave Behind
third week of August: Beginning of the Mercy Tour, Fenway Park

The Mercy Tour, I like it :)
 
you mean I might actually get a vacation? I can plan a trip to the east coast/Boston AND squeeze in a concert of my favorite band. Ah.... DREAM OUT LOUD!!!

:wink:
 
Hey, U2, here's a good idea: forget about the fucking US for half a minute and play the rest of the world.

If they do three legs in the US without another album to justify the third, that will be nothing short of pathetic. I'll be prepared to forgive it only if they tour the rest of the bloody world first (THE REST OF THE WORLD, not freakin' Western Europe).
 
As long as they come back to Europe....

Seriously though, I'd never predicted that they'd do a ZooTV again. By that I mean a two-year tour. I mean, you hadn't either had you? This can only be considered as good news, although Axver is right, if they do consider 4th/5th/6th legs or whatever, then the US should not be the priority.

Should be Europe :D
 
I wonder what would be cheaper, doing a tour of Aus, Asia, and South America, or just having the band fly all the fans into the states to see the 3rd, 4th and 5th legs here???

I heard they are doing 9 consecutive nights at Fenway followed by 12 in Chicago, and 15 in Giants Stadium.
 
maybe......they are planning to do South America/Mexico Summer 2006 and decided that they might as well add a few stadium dates in like 4 big US cities while they're in the area, perhaps to make a bit of extra money to offset the cost of S. American dates.
 
Maybe U2 won't play anywhere next year,now wouldn't that be funny.Australia,asia,south america,US and europe again,c'mon this ain't going to happen,no way jose
 
claytons edge said:
Maybe U2 won't play anywhere next year,now wouldn't that be funny.

Yeah, real funny for all those in the Southern Hemisphere who haven't seen U2 for eight years and counting (thirteen if you happen to live in New Zealand). :|
 
if this extra leg is to promote a new album then u2 are being extrmely naive (remember the making of pop........don't book a tour until you have a completed album)
Is this event like a festival or is it one of thier own gigs?

I agree with every1 else who has said that they should tour other continents that they haven't visited in years (it will be 9 years in 2006 since they visited Austraila and South America
 
I don't think U2 will be doing a 3rd leg in the US. These rumors always seem to surface toward the end of the tour. POPMART someone had them in for sure in Boston, Chicago and Anaheim for 6 shows. The person even said they heard it from a friend who worked at the pond so they would stake their life on it. Well I am not sure if they died or not but U2 didn't do anaheim in October of 98
Don't believe the HYPE!
 
In response to burns, a gig at Fenway would be a headlining act, not a festival. Fenway Park chooses one artist each year to play two dates in August. That's it.
2003: Bruce Springsteen
2004: Jimmy Buffet
2005: The Rolling Stones
2006: ???
 
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.
 
randhail said:
Call me crazy but am I the only one that would rather have them play The Razor (Gillette Stadium) over Fenway?

Yes you are, crazy.
 
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.

Hey, we know U2 already rules CFL football. It was a U2 gig at Olympic Stadium that caused the Montreal Alouettes to move one of their playoff games to Magill University's field. The team loved it so much that they moved out of the Big O (except for special occasions) and into Magill permanently.
 
Tom in Boston said:
The same rumor came out last year. People were talking about U2 performing at Fenway in late August 2005. Instead, the Stones are here this week. I wouldn't count on this, but I suppose it's possible. If Steve Morse from the Boston Globe reports it, then I'd start to believe it. I don't know who these other writers are.
U2 was one of the acts considered for this summer (2005) at Fenway, and its likely that had they been doing stadia in the US they would have been there instead of the Stones, because from what I know, the discussions witn U2 took place before the Stones had finalized the decision to tour, with Charlie Watts' health being uncertain.

At any rate, big news this morning is that the Boston Police will be patrolling the Fenway area while the Stones play with noise meters, and will tell Stones' management to lower the volume if the levels go beyond whats agreed with the neighborhood association. This patrol is supposedly also critical to whether the city will allow any further concerts at Fenway in the future according to WBZ radio, so Keef could Kibosh the whole U2 at Fenway thing by turning his amp up to 11.
 
Hewson said:
At any rate, big news this morning is that the Boston Police will be patrolling the Fenway area while the Stones play with noise meters, and will tell Stones' management to lower the volume if the levels go beyond whats agreed with the neighborhood association. This patrol is supposedly also critical to whether the city will allow any further concerts at Fenway in the future according to WBZ radio, so Keef could Kibosh the whole U2 at Fenway thing by turning his amp up to 11.

A co-worker said this morning that yesterday's Stones soundcheck could be heard inside a hospital that was 4 blocks away. She was visiting a friend and heard it pretty clearly. Hmmmmm.
 
Has anybody been to a concert at beloved Fenway? How is the sound quality there? I've heard it's poor. Also, how is the seating/standing arrangement worked out?
 
I doubt there would be GA at Fenway. Many people consider the ground there sacred and so I'm guessing they would set up seats on the field, as they did with Bruce Springsteen. I'm not sure how field seating was for Buffet or for this weekend.
 
Theedge070 said:
Has anybody been to a concert at beloved Fenway? How is the sound quality there? I've heard it's poor. Also, how is the seating/standing arrangement worked out?

I saw Bruce there and it was awesome. Granted, I got tickets in a drop two days before the show and was just to the right of the stage, so I don't know if the sound was as good in the stands.

The stage is set at the back of the outfield, and they lined up seats there. However, there were no seats on the infield. It was kind of odd looking behind you and seeing an empty space between the crowd directly near the stage and the rest of the people in the stands.

But I really didn't care! Amazing show.
 
phanan said:


I saw Bruce there and it was awesome. Granted, I got tickets in a drop two days before the show and was just to the right of the stage, so I don't know if the sound was as good in the stands.

The stage is set at the back of the outfield, and they lined up seats there. However, there were no seats on the infield. It was kind of odd looking behind you and seeing an empty space between the crowd directly near the stage and the rest of the people in the stands.

But I really didn't care! Amazing show.

Wait, so...the stage is against the center field wall? And sporadically along the outfield they have rows of chairs? So is there seating available in the actual stands? Or no?

Isn't there some sort of tarp put out on the field? There had to be, otherwise there would be crap all over the field!
 
Here is a picture from the Springsteen show to give people an idea on the seating.

I have a bunch of pictures from those shows, but thought that this showed the seating setup the best.
 

Attachments

  • 89308914tlrjuv_ph.jpg
    89308914tlrjuv_ph.jpg
    49.8 KB · Views: 59
Back
Top Bottom