Blood on the Rooftops - what does "they're out for 23" mean?

[Rick L.]

Serious question. Is that line actually a direct reference to cricket lingo?

Nah. Just a random joke. I was reading the explanation of cricket rules and that lyric came to mind. Same band, so......

[aith01]

Democratic as long as you agreed with Banks, that is... Nothing went on in the band unless Banks agreed with it.
And I'm really not sure they (read Banks) "allowed" Hackett to do a solo album, but since Mike & Phil contributed, Tony had no choice.
The thing is that Steve is cruelly under-represented in the near-perfect TotT, so Banks gave him more space in W&W, but I'm sure that YOSW was double the length it needed to be to stop one more track from Steve (Please Don't Touch, I think) finding a spot on the album

Hugues, where do you get these ideas from? Sheesh...

Your antipathy towards Banks is noted for the record but immensely overstated. Was Banks very headstrong and the most vocal about his opinions on the music selections--sure. But stating that Banks had ultimate say and authority on everything vastly overstates the case. And what evidence do you have that YOSW (which was Rutherford's, not Banks') was 'double the length it needed to be just to keep Please Don't Touch off the album'? That's preposterous, and absent a transcript of your secret recordings you made while they were recording the W&W sessions, I reject such silliness out of hand. In fact, the quote I most often see is something like "Genesis tried Hackett's Please Don't Touch for the W&W album, but Phil could not get behind it". As for Steve's contributions to Trick/W&W, I obviously was speaking specifically about his written song contributions. He used up several good tunes he wrote doing Acolyte was the point. Thanks for the groovy colors though....

The Anti-Banks crew imagine/invent all sorts of alternate histories to fit a narrative that Tony Banks was a villain and oppressed the other band members (especially Steve's) efforts to contribute. It's tiresome, and outright ignores what has been stated repeatedly by the band members over the years. Some folks just have it in for Tony, and prefer to paint Steve as a mistreated victim -- it's actually pretty unfair to both parties, if you think about it.

[Trane]

I'm not going to argue endelessly or go back in the different books I have to confirm X, Y or Z position or historicak tidbits (don't care to, have no time, and TBH, don't give a hoot), so I'll stop after this round of reply.

>>>>Disagree on both counts based on the various books on the subject. Genesis surely was not "certain" to continue after Gabriel left. They didn't have a lead singer, auditioned dozens of singers, and only when they realized that Collins could step up and take the lead vocals on (and that he was willing to do it), were they confident everything would be ok and they would move forward. Of course they were determined to make a go of it, but I certainly would not call it "certain".
Your take on Collins is slightly off also. His flirting with the idea of leaving and doing a solo album was during his marital problems which occurred during the ATTWT tour and became voiced most prominently in 1979 after the tour, which is when the other 2 told him 'take some time, work out your marital thing if possible, we were going to work on solo albums anyway'. That is when he then started working on his own solo album. The band had agreed to take that time off and reconvene after they got those albums out of their system. By that time they were mature enough to do the solo album thing while still keeping the band together. But the primary point is clear--they didn't go to pieces after Hackett left by a long shot.

Yup "determined" was a better word than "certain", but no doubt they would've gone on with a different singer than Collins, for at least one album. Though I'm not sure about the resulting album without Collins at the mic.
As for Collins, I remember Vancouver (where Phil blurts out his marital problems - he even moved there to mend things with his wife) released on a single right about the ATTWT release (which is first part of 1978)... By that time, it was last chance for the couple, so Phil's marital problems date prior to ATTWT's release and the crisis was already there during W&W (though I'll precede you in saying that I wasn't there to hold a diary). So no, I think you're slightly off on the Collins crisis...

And yes, Genesis was in bigger trouble in 78 than in 75...

>>>> Your antipathy towards Banks is noted for the record but immensely overstated. Was Banks very headstrong and the most vocal about his opinions on the music selections--sure. But stating that Banks had ultimate say and authority on everything vastly overstates the case. And what evidence do you have that YOSW (which was Rutherford's, not Banks') was 'double the length it needed to be just to keep Please Don't Touch off the album'? That's preposterous, and absent a transcript of your secret recordings you made while they were recording the W&W sessions, I reject such silliness out of hand. In fact, the quote I most often see is something like "Genesis tried Hackett's Please Don't Touch for the W&W album, but Phil could not get behind it". As for Steve's contributions to Trick/W&W, I obviously was speaking specifically about his written song contributions. He used up several good tunes he wrote doing Acolyte was the point. Thanks for the groovy colors though....

Who says I'm anti-Banks? He was the centre of the band (once Peter left) and it seems like he favoured Mike as second fiddle for obvious ancienty reasons. Banks' tracks are of a higher caliber on TOTT and W&W than Steve's are. And I didn't say that Banks made all of the decisions, just that if he objected to something, it wouldn't happen. Nuance, mon cher

BTW, I know YOSW is Mike's - and you're right, the useless second round of YOSW theory to stop PDT is just that: a theory, but let's face it: 1 + 1 = 2 .... You have to be blind not to see it. Of course no-one in the band cares to ignite the firecrackers and openly wash the dirty linen in public.

And btw, if I used red, it was to differentiate the different comments, not because I was red-angry or tried to make you red-angry

Hugues, where do you get these ideas from? Sheesh...

The Anti-Banks crew imagine/invent all sorts of alternate histories to fit a narrative that Tony Banks was a villain and oppressed the other band members (especially Steve's) efforts to contribute. It's tiresome, and outright ignores what has been stated repeatedly by the band members over the years. Some folks just have it in for Tony, and prefer to paint Steve as a mistreated victim -- it's actually pretty unfair to both parties, if you think about it.

I'm neither pro or anti Mike (or Steve, FTM).
Saying Steve was being oppressed in Genesis is wrong (and I never said that). Steve tried to get a more important songwriting role inside the band (though it's the first time I hear about that 25% claim of his) and didn't get it, so he left. Period. It was Tony that said no, not Mike or Phil.

Now that Banks resented that Steve left is plainly obvious (Hackett's guitars are barely audible in Second Out), and still nowadays, when Genesis releases a new "history boxset, Peter is more than welcome (and probably begged to join), but Steve is notably (or often conspicuously) absent on half of those press get-together.

[Ground and Sky's Ghost]

I grew up playing and loving baseball, and from late teens on always had a strong desire to learn and play cricket, but no one plays it in the US.

They do! It seems to be a growing thing in fact.
https://www.usacricket.org/

I worked with some Indians (being in IT, of course) and they played regularly - had some kind of informal league.

There's a group, mostly Indian guys, who play every weekend during the Summer in Harrisburg, PA on the old State Hospital grounds. The only reason I know about it is because a bicycle trail that I used to ride pretty frequently went right by where they held their games. I stopped to watch a couple times but not long enough to pick up the rules.

[bigbassdrum]

Happy 68th birthday to Tony Banks !

I would offer up this song as the pinnacle of Tony's use of the mellotron/keyboards; it is so close to an orchestral rendering to my ears

[Progatron]

The Anti-Banks crew imagine/invent all sorts of alternate histories to fit a narrative that Tony Banks was a villain and oppressed the other band members (especially Steve's) efforts to contribute. It's tiresome, and outright ignores what has been stated repeatedly by the band members over the years. Some folks just have it in for Tony, and prefer to paint Steve as a mistreated victim -- it's actually pretty unfair to both parties, if you think about it.

Well said, this is so true. Noticed it countless times over the years.

[Sturgeon's Lawyer]

The Anti-Banks crew imagine/invent all sorts of alternate histories to fit a narrative that Tony Banks was a villain and oppressed the other band members (especially Steve's) efforts to contribute. It's tiresome, and outright ignores what has been stated repeatedly by the band members over the years. Some folks just have it in for Tony, and prefer to paint Steve as a mistreated victim -- it's actually pretty unfair to both parties, if you think about it.

Not to make it a political thread (God forbid), but it *does* remind me of the way the GOP seems to think of the Clintons... Or, for that matter, the way some Democrats feel about GWB.

[aith01]

I'm neither pro or anti Mike (or Steve, FTM).
Saying Steve was being oppressed in Genesis is wrong (and I never said that). Steve tried to get a more important songwriting role inside the band (though it's the first time I hear about that 25% claim of his) and didn't get it, so he left. Period. It was Tony that said no, not Mike or Phil.

Now that Banks resented that Steve left is plainly obvious (Hackett's guitars are barely audible in Second Out), and still nowadays, when Genesis releases a new "history boxset, Peter is more than welcome (and probably begged to join), but Steve is notably (or often conspicuously) absent on half of those press get-together.

Your comments are clearly anti-Banks though.

Where do you have it that Tony was the one who said "no" to Steve getting more of his songs onto Genesis records?

The oft-repeated "anecdote" of Tony mixing Steve out of the Seconds Out certainly never gets old. This gets repeated as if it's fact, and in spite of the evidence some folks refuse to let it go. Hackett's guitar is plainly audible to anyone with ears.

Regarding the reunion stuff, the trio (not just Tony) wanted a 5-man reunion. When Peter wouldn't join, they went with the 3-man configuration (plus Chester and Daryl). Let's face it -- can you picture Steve wanting to play songs like "Invisible Touch" or "Home by The Sea"? Steve still seems like a bit of an outsider when compared to the rest of the band, but that kind of thing can go both ways. There's two sides to every story.

[Mister Triscuits]

There's two sides to every story.

But there are three sides live.

[aith01]

But there are three sides live.

True! Unless you're in the US, and then there's technically four sides live.

Or did I get that reversed? I can never remember which version had the 4th side of unreleased studio tracks.

[Trane]

Your comments are clearly anti-Banks though.

Where do you have it that Tony was the one who said "no" to Steve getting more of his songs onto Genesis records?

I just read it in this thread, I believe... and it wasn't me writing it...

and no, you're reading my words as anti-sumthin'

Regarding the reunion stuff, the trio (not just Tony) wanted a 5-man reunion. When Peter wouldn't join, they went with the 3-man configuration (plus Chester and Daryl). Let's face it -- can you picture Steve wanting to play songs like "Invisible Touch" or "Home by The Sea"? Steve still seems like a bit of an outsider when compared to the rest of the band, but that kind of thing can go both ways. There's two sides to every story.

Your argument is really weak, here

Could you have pictured The Gabe singing those same songs??
Of course not!! (and they probably wouldn't dare suggesting it to Peter)

So why change the whole plan (set list) if Peter doesn't say yes (as he did), and Steve would've said yes to it (and you just know he would've loved to join)? Because Peter's acceptance would've made Steve an (almost) obligatory inclusion... But since Peter declined, all of a sudden, Steve becomes persona non-grata.
Go back to the thread on PE (can't remember what it's called) about this reunion & boxset, and you'll clearly see that everyone thinks that Banks is the main reason as to Steve's absence, even by viewing the interviews , it's detectable in what he says and how he says it.


As I had said, I was going to stop, but I guess you lured me into another round, but I'd rather not go further.

[gojikranz]

while we would love a 4 man reunion it does seem a odd period for a large scale reunion presuming that steve would not have wanted to play on the 80s hits. now for all we know he would a been game if he had been asked but regardless if they had gone into a big reunion tour as a 4 man group I think the large public would wonder why the hell phil Collins isn's singing the hits wheras as with peter Gabriel you would assume a bit more knowledge that genesis with peter Gabriel is a different thing(though I imagine a certain portion wondering why they didn't do sledgehammer).

[bill g]

Regarding the reunion stuff, the trio (not just Tony) wanted a 5-man reunion. When Peter wouldn't join, they went with the 3-man configuration (plus Chester and Daryl). Let's face it -- can you picture Steve wanting to play songs like "Invisible Touch" or "Home by The Sea"? Steve still seems like a bit of an outsider when compared to the rest of the band, but that kind of thing can go both ways. There's two sides to every story.

Yes it's been stated in multiple interviews Tony wanted a 5-man reunion and since he prefers at this point the old Genesis, would have had his allies to do all the good old stuff. Though it's hard to imagine Steve (or Peter) playing a song like 'Invisible Touch', it would probably have done wonders for the song! Steve soloing over various songs where Mike should have soloed or something could have been interesting. Ah well... I like Steve's band doing all the great old stuff, so I'm very happy we have that!

[DocProgger]

True! Unless you're in the US, and then there's technically four sides live.

Or did I get that reversed? I can never remember which version had the 4th side of unreleased studio tracks.

reversed, the 4th side studio was the US release

Regarding the reunion stuff, the trio (not just Tony) wanted a 5-man reunion. When Peter wouldn't join, they went with the 3-man configuration (plus Chester and Daryl).

Yup, exactly. They, including Tony, wanted the true full 5 man classic reunion to take place. Steve was in for that. The only one who put the kibosh on it was Peter. Once Peter declined, they weren't going to do a "4 man reunion" with them just playing stuff up until 1977. Wouldn't make sense. Nor was Hackett going to want to do tunes from the Genesis 80s catalog. It was a full 5 man, or the next logical default choice, a 3 man era reunion with the live band that had existed from 1978 through the mid 90s, to put a proper capper to that era of the band.

[DocProgger]

I'm not going to argue endelessly or go back in the different books I have to confirm X, Y or Z position or historicak tidbits (don't care to, have no time, and TBH, don't give a hoot), so I'll stop after this round of reply.



Yup "determined" was a better word than "certain", but no doubt they would've gone on with a different singer than Collins, for at least one album. Though I'm not sure about the resulting album without Collins at the mic.
As for Collins, I remember Vancouver (where Phil blurts out his marital problems - he even moved there to mend things with his wife) released on a single right about the ATTWT release (which is first part of 1978)... By that time, it was last chance for the couple, so Phil's marital problems date prior to ATTWT's release and the crisis was already there during W&W (though I'll precede you in saying that I wasn't there to hold a diary). So no, I think you're slightly off on the Collins crisis...

And yes, Genesis was in bigger trouble in 78 than in 75...



Who says I'm anti-Banks? He was the centre of the band (once Peter left) and it seems like he favoured Mike as second fiddle for obvious ancienty reasons. Banks' tracks are of a higher caliber on TOTT and W&W than Steve's are. And I didn't say that Banks made all of the decisions, just that if he objected to something, it wouldn't happen. Nuance, mon cher

BTW, I know YOSW is Mike's - and you're right, the useless second round of YOSW theory to stop PDT is just that: a theory, but let's face it: 1 + 1 = 2 .... You have to be blind not to see it. Of course no-one in the band cares to ignite the firecrackers and openly wash the dirty linen in public.

And btw, if I used red, it was to differentiate the different comments, not because I was red-angry or tried to make you red-angry



I'm neither pro or anti Mike (or Steve, FTM).
Saying Steve was being oppressed in Genesis is wrong (and I never said that). Steve tried to get a more important songwriting role inside the band (though it's the first time I hear about that 25% claim of his) and didn't get it, so he left. Period. It was Tony that said no, not Mike or Phil.

Now that Banks resented that Steve left is plainly obvious (Hackett's guitars are barely audible in Second Out), and still nowadays, when Genesis releases a new "history boxset, Peter is more than welcome (and probably begged to join), but Steve is notably (or often conspicuously) absent on half of those press get-together.

Lmao. This is some fascinating stuff. You really should write a book and call it "The True Inside Scoop on Genesis--The Real Story" and pitch it to some outfit like TMZ or Deadspin as a docudrama or a novella. In this climate, especially in the US where facts are secondary, spin and hot takes rule, and things like actual history and education and factual accuracy are demeaned and ridiculed and even defunded; where instead blogs of 'fake news' are accepted as fact by millions, this is the kind of stuff that would sell! I do admire you for admitting you simply made up the your "theory" about YOSW though---kudos for your honesty in that one instance. So if you ever actually get to the point of 'giving a hoot' about this stuff, you should go for it!

[moecurlythanu]

Tony ... prefers at this point the old Genesis,

Do you have a link or source for that?

[aith01]

I just read it in this thread, I believe... and it wasn't me writing it...

and no, you're reading my words as anti-sumthin'

Hugues, by doing that, all you accomplish is to perpetuate misinformation about a man you don't even know -- regarding events none of us were actually present for. Tony, Mike, Phil, and even Steve have long ago given their accounts of what happened back then. Why do any of us need to second-guess that?

Your argument is really weak, here

Could you have pictured The Gabe singing those same songs??
Of course not!! (and they probably wouldn't dare suggesting it to Peter)

So why change the whole plan (set list) if Peter doesn't say yes (as he did), and Steve would've said yes to it (and you just know he would've loved to join)? Because Peter's acceptance would've made Steve an (almost) obligatory inclusion... But since Peter declined, all of a sudden, Steve becomes persona non-grata.

It's not an argument. You're missing the point. The whole point of the 5-man reunion was that they'd be able to do material that Peter Gabriel had sung on -- including The Lamb. They'd be drawing from more of their classic era, and in some of the interviews they did leading up to the 2007 tour they stressed that the 3-man tour was going to be more comprehensive (i.e. material from across their whole career) than a 5-man tour would. If Pete had been on board -- which would have resulted in Steve's inclusion as well -- we'd very likely have seen setlists featuring more of the 70s "proggy" stuff. Perhaps even some Gabriel and Collins solo material in a souped up form (hey, I can dream can't I?).

Go back to the thread on PE (can't remember what it's called) about this reunion & boxset, and you'll clearly see that everyone thinks that Banks is the main reason as to Steve's absence, even by viewing the interviews , it's detectable in what he says and how he says it.

I know the thread you're referring to, and no, everyone does not think that. Some very vocal people do, but that does not make it fact. The overblown "Banks vs. Hackett" stuff is brought up by the usual culprits, and they attempt to read way too much into what is said (or not said) by the band members during different interviews.

You can think and say whatever you like, but as long as you continue to perpetuate this stuff here it won't go unchallenged.

[aith01]

Yes it's been stated in multiple interviews Tony wanted a 5-man reunion and since he prefers at this point the old Genesis, would have had his allies to do all the good old stuff. Though it's hard to imagine Steve (or Peter) playing a song like 'Invisible Touch', it would probably have done wonders for the song! Steve soloing over various songs where Mike should have soloed or something could have been interesting. Ah well... I like Steve's band doing all the great old stuff, so I'm very happy we have that!

Oh man, I would have loved to see/hear Pete and Steve on some of those 80s Genesis songs. It could have been brilliant.

That said, I'm glad that Steve parted ways with the band when he did. It resulted in the Genesis catalog I know and love to this day, and Steve has gotten to have the artistic freedom to do whatever he wanted pretty much -- and he gave us some great music as a solo artist resulting from that split. I'm thankful!

[Progatron]

That said, I'm glad that Steve parted ways with the band when he did. It resulted in the Genesis catalog I know and love to this day, and Steve has gotten to have the artistic freedom to do whatever he wanted pretty much -- and he gave us some great music as a solo artist resulting from that split. I'm thankful!

Totally agree with this. I love Hackett's stuff with and without Genesis, and as a true lover of And Then There Were Three and Duke, I have zero complaints about the course of history.

[DocProgger]

I can't say I'm glad Steve left Genesis, I think they would have been a stronger band in the 80s/90s with him, and Steve could have still done some solo albums along the way. But it was not meant to be, and Steve is more than making up for it by carrying forward the classic Genesis prog flag with these revisited tours and I love those. So it's all good for the most part.

[moecurlythanu]

Steve was the heart and soul of that band, but I had no idea at the time. I came on board around the time he left anyway.

[DocProgger]

Steve was the heart and soul of that band, but I had no idea at the time. I came on board around the time he left anyway.

Imo, the Genesis "sound" was rooted in Banks' keyboards and his epic compositions, but what I missed most in the 80s was the interplay of the keyboards with Hackett's signature guitar style. Rutherford was ok on lead, but limited in his riffs. I would have loved to hear what more Banks/Hackett musical collaborations would have sounded like going forward.

[moecurlythanu]

I was pondering it yesterday, due to this thread. Lets assume all the solo albums still get made when they did. I think Hackett would have greatly boosted ATTWT and Duke, but when it came time to do Abacab, Steve may have decided their paths were diverging more than he could stomach, and jumped ship at that point. Maybe not, we'll never know. It would have been interesting to see the results had he stayed, though.

However, I'm someone who has always been curious what Genesis would have created had Ant never left too.

[bill g]

Do you have a link or source for that?

He's said it in multiple interviews over the last few years. The major one, he stated outright that his favorite Genesis period was Foxtrot through Duke. Unfortunately, he's done a lot of interviews over the last few years and I don't know which one offhand. I believe it was a Banks interview though rather than a Genesis interview. A couple of the interviews for 'Five' he said as much, though not as outright.

[undergroundrailroad]

I would offer up this song as the pinnacle of Tony's use of the mellotron/keyboards

The oboe synth/mellotron strings interlude in the middle of both verses is to me the most magical thing he ever did.