|
Post by moorlock2003 on Aug 3, 2019 9:58:07 GMT
It seems one or two people who post here have landed in the wrong place. This is not a Graham Nash forum; it is a Hollies forum.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2019 11:29:14 GMT
Eh? I haven't seen many postings on Graham's post '68 pursuits, only his time with The Hollies.
|
|
|
Post by moorlock2003 on Sept 12, 2019 16:02:16 GMT
Eh? I haven't seen many postings on Graham's post '68 pursuits, only his time with The Hollies. Eh? I'm referring to you, bub. You claim to only like the Graham Nash era, then name the Dylan album as the only post-Nash album you like, an album your hero Nash despised. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense (not). You have zero respect for the band without Nash. What are you doing here then, besides making an arse out of yourself??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2019 20:24:44 GMT
Are you telling me that you respect the current line-up??
Surely there's room here for fans of all eras, even those that come out with laughable statements such as claiming that Terry Sylvester was more important to their success than Allan Clarke.
I've never claimed to only like the Nash era, though I do confess that, with occasional exceptions such as the Dylan album, I generally prefer the 1963-1968 years... just as you, rather bizarrely, prefer the, mercifully brief, commercially unsuccessful, Rickfors era.
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Sept 12, 2019 21:38:05 GMT
moorlock2003 who do you think you are coming on this Hollies forum to start an argument (again)? You constantly try to hammer home the importance of the Rickfors era, as if it was the pinnacle of the Hollies' career, when there's another 60 or so years of their career to discuss. So coming for Peter for no reason whatsoever (I've not even seen him post here recently about the Nash era) makes absolutely no sense when you yourself try to pull every thread back to the Rickfors era. If you've come to this forum to be vexed and bitter, you'd be better joining Twitter and following Terry Sylvester...
|
|
|
Post by anthony on Sept 12, 2019 23:34:50 GMT
moorlock2003 who do you think you are coming on this Hollies forum to start an argument (again)? You constantly try to hammer home the importance of the Rickfors era, as if it was the pinnacle of the Hollies' career, when there's another 60 or so years of their career to discuss. So coming for Peter for no reason whatsoever (I've not even seen him post here recently about the Nash era) makes absolutely no sense when you yourself try to pull every thread back to the Rickfors era. If you've come to this forum to be vexed and bitter, you'd be better joining Twitter and following Terry Sylvester... I'm sure this is only Moorlock trying to have a joke, hey how can he talk about respect, People are entitled to like what ever about the Hollies. I believe when Moorlock slams this current line up he is showing no respect to Tony or Bobby two very long term members of the Hollies, I'm not going to say original members as I'll get slammed for that. The main thing is if the group bring happiness to us the public then that's great, if you are a fan of Nash, Clarke, Rickfors, Howarth, that's great. No one here is the Lord of Hollies fans, we all love something about the group.,
|
|
|
Post by moorlock2003 on Dec 17, 2019 1:33:42 GMT
I have to hammer home the fact that the Rickfors era is just as great if not greater than any other, in order to balance out the numbskulls who constantly hammer home their marginalizing it, just because the live shows didn't happen on UK soil. Well that's just too bad isn't it?
|
|