The Stones are so played out.

Not a very strong criticism, but then again I can't see Ringo feeling strongly about much.

Anyway this is sort of dumb and shouldn't really be considered news.

The Stones put on great shows. I was near the back at MSG and they were still great from there. Its the music that matters the most anyway

its not actually a critism of the band themselves at all. Its a critism of the stadiums they play. he doesnt actually say there a bad band live once.

Ooh shut up Ringo. First learn to play drums before critisizing Rolling Stones.This Message Edited On 05.10.07

Ringo's playing style is nearly flawless for the Beatles, I don't know what you're talking about.

i dont like the rolling stones or the beatles.....its all about cream

Ooh shut up Ringo. First learn to play drums before critisizing Rolling Stones.

when in that intire article did it say that ringo was critisizing the Rolling Stones if anything he was complementing them because he was watching them play even if it wasnt in the audience

does my opinion matter any which is that I don't like both these bands

Rolling Stones are so bland.

You shouldn't tell the arguably most influential drummer of rock music that.

actually, there was a thing i saw where they interviewed a bunch of drummers and most said ringo was their first drumming hero.

chops=/=talent=/=influence.

hey ringo is good...no kieth moon, but he's solid and fun...who needs niel pert when you have the music of the beatles layed over it...plus the stones after brian jones suck sooo bad. most overrated boring fuck ing band ever...save maybe van halen

Please, tell me who you think is a more influential drummer than Ringo Starr.

i have to disagree with ringo being the most influential drummer... baker, bonham, moon and peart i think played a bigger role...ringo just tagged along for the beatle's ride