Yes you would you kidders.
If it's a situation of "look, we signed a contract to do this prior to knowing the extent of Larry's injuries, so we're doing it with Larry's drum tech, with Larry's blessing, and he'll be back with us on your next year"?
You bet your ass I'd go.
Absolutely! Presented that way, I'd go and a lot of people here saying they wouldn't go would also go.
Granted, two totally different situations, but when they absolutely needed that dry run for the Zoo TV Sydney filming to go ahead, they went without Adam. They then continued the rest of the tour (only a few shows, but still) with substantial questions over whether the band could go on with how bad Adam's addictions had gotten. I don't have it in front of me, but I believe they did seriously consider booting him and going on as being an option.
So while I agree 100% that U2 can't just replace members at will like say, Van Halen or AC/DC could (so long as they had Eddie and Angus), I don't make the leap to this idea that they would never entertain playing if they're down a man. Especially when that man is in the rhythm section and most especially if he's blessed this and it's understood as a stint on the disabled list rather than a departure for other reasons.
Most importantly, as you said a few pages back, we are getting ahead of ourselves here! It is very unlikely these physical ailments and procedures to remedy them are new in the last couple weeks. The opening date of the venue itself is still very much up in the air.
I kind of see this like the big article Bono wrote somewhere when he was all laid up from the bike accident. Early January 2015. He said "this will be all the communication I can muster for early 2015" and everyone freaked and thought the I&E tour and everything else was in jeopardy.
I know Larry didn't say "early" but he also didn't qualify what "playing" would look like. Can't do a traditional U2 tour or can't do a handful of shows in one venue, likely with doctors who are retained and can stay in place with him?
On a deeper level, this is just another reminder for me that everything we get from U2 is gravy now. I want 10 -15 more years as much as anyone, but people need to come to terms with the fact that we are in overtime! Have been for quite some time now. U2 have been as prolific as any band their age could be expected to be in this last decade. The OL/Invisible era, SOI, SOE, I&E, E&I, JT17& 19. Reworking these songs through the pandemic. Having SOS done and now gearing up for what I'd still put money on as being a 1-2 punch of back catalog shows (Vegas Sphere) and a brand new album/tour cycle.
