Skip to main content

Liam Gallagher fans left annoyed with last minute venue change.

Liam Gallagher (LG) didn't disappoint in Sydney last night.

He still sings with his hands behind his back with his knees slightly bent. He came out singing some of his older songs, sung the opening line to Rock n roll star 'I live my life in the cittaaay' which got the crowd going initially.

His new songs are sounding just as good as the older ones and his voice has not weakened with time.

LG is a character. He is consistent, has his unique walk and still wears his iconic parkas (despite it being an Australian summer). He promised to wear it and he delivered.

As with every LG concert most Oasis fans will inevitably ask 'Where is Noel?'

That question was never asked last night in Sydney as LG held his own and did not appear to need his big brother. He proved that he can pull off a 'one man show'.

He was professional, was was due to come on at 9.30pm and came out at 9.30pm. There were no tantrums like his younger 90s days. Or perhaps tantrums are reserved for when he is around his big brother?

LG is all grown up now and we still love him. He interacts with his crowd more than other singers. He asked the crowd 'Are we gonna talk about the cricket?' and singled out fans to talk to. The working class background of LG means that he is approachable and quite funny. He is entertaining to watch and not stuffy at all. This is part of his appeal.

The crowd was a mixed bag of ages. There were kids wearing the iconic 90s bucket hats that LG used to wear. One girl had a Manchester United flag.


Image result for liam gallagher
The only two downfalls were the warm up band and the last minute venue change.

The warm up band was SSHH. The lead singer was not to everyone's taste and concert goers were not afraid to make that known. SSHH talked to the crowd with a a lot of confidence but unfortunately the crowd didn't reciprocate the confidence in SSHH. The music coming from SSHH, in my opinion is not consistent with what an Oasis fan would have liked, but I suppose the Stone Roses were busy.

The last minute venue change was poorly organised. Concert goers were not notified via email or text of the venue change (from the Enmore to the Hordern Pavilion). The only notification was a single A4 sheet of paper sticky taped to the front door of the Enmore. Which would have been fine for the 1970s but considering we live in 2018...try harder please.

The two venues are at different ends of town. The Enmore being a more intimate setting, whereas the Hordern Pavillon being a larger venue. With larger venues inevitably comes more 'nanny state' treatment. Such as body scans, bag searches and no water bottles. The Pavilion successfully prevented water bottles from going into the venue but failed to prevent smokers from lighting up inside.

There was no guaranteed allocated seating like the Enmore but the majority of people who needed a seat most likely got one if they came early enough.

LG was worth seeing despite the above. A fun concert overall.

As you were.

xxx


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How safe is your baby really?

The strict requirements sound fit for hannibal lecter or a vampire. But no, it's actually for babies.  Safety requirements change over time but maternal instinct and proper supervision don't.  When I was expecting my first child I was super excited about the prospect of buying new stuff. In that 'decorate the nursery' kind of way. When I walked into the baby store that excitement quickly turned into dread. so many products were shouting at me. 'BUY ME.' 'You'll need me to make your child SMART. You'll need me to keep your child SAFE. There was so many products aimed at babies, newborns, 6 months, 12 months. I tried to rationalise it all. What did I really need? I then categorised them into 'nice to haves' and 'essentials'. 'I shouldn't buy this book (number 30)' I thought to myself.  How much can a 6 week old baby really read or understand? As the Mum guilt ensues.. the credit card comes out. Take my mone...

Malcolm in the Middle

Why it’s better to be feared than loved if you cannot be both After the recent resignation of Malcolm Turnbull there has been much commentary surrounding his contributions or, more accurately, lack of contributions during his stint as Prime Minister. Leading up to his original appointment as Prime Minister he came with much promise and ambition as a strong Coalition leader. He represented a palatable ‘centre-right’ leader with moderate political beliefs. On the one hand approved by conservatives for being pro business and those to the left found him to be their preferred coalition leader for his stance on the Republic.  His political persona was a smooth negotiator and a successful wealthy business man in his own right.  Finding the balance between being a leader with conviction and one who played it safe and survived was the question for Turnbull. He chose the latter. Self preservation. Unfortunately in politics, it is cut throat, even choosing the saf...

It's not accurate to say that someone 'lost' their battle with cancer

Whenever I see a well known person or celebrity who died of cancer the common text surrounding the death will usually include sentences such as ‘they lost their battle with cancer.’ I’ve had family members pass away from this disease but I know that I am not alone. Around 1 in 3 people will be diagnosed with cancer at some point in their lives. My issue with the phrase is that cancer is not a battle one can control. By categorising a cancer death with ‘losing the battle’ implies that there is an element of control by the person suffering from the disease. The success rate will depend on the stage of cancer, how far it has spread and how aggressive the cancer is. Even after a cancer battle is ‘won’ (meaning remission) it is still an on going burden. Cancer treatment today involves chemotherapy but the important thing to remember is that chemotherapy is not a cure. It is a treatment. That individual will still need to monitor their cancer for years to come. ...