I thought it was a really balanced review and score. Remember Gar, the review did rate the album highly. 7 out of 10 is an excellent score, Mediocre albums don't (or at least shouldn't) get more than 5 0ut of 10. Eoghans obviously a huge U2 fan but that didn't cloud his judgment. Genuinely interesting to read too and held my attention despite being a bit longer than the average review. The one question it raised in my mind though is, is now a good time for U2 to split and bow out with dignity while we still remember them as a great band? Much as I'd hate to see what has become a national institution to come to an end, I can't help but feel that U2 are no longer a strong creative force. Possibly Bono is just too distracted these days? So Eoghan, great review, does this mean you will be getting out from hiding behind that editors desk more often?

Binokular, In relation to what you asked about U2 bowing out, in my opinion, Iwould have to say no, if they can still produce a good album, albeit maybe not a great album, I reckon they should keep on truckin on while they still have "it". In their 25 odd years as a band they haven't haven't become parodies of themselves like say the Rolling Stones or The Who, they still have excellent live shows which surpass some gigs by the fresher fish on the scene. I think they have another few albums, maybe 3 or 4 before it's time to throw in the towel...

I know Eoghan didn't slate the album and 7 outta 10 is a high score. In my opinion, I would have rated it higher, that's all. And wondered if anyone else would too? About U2 splitting up, no way. As Karilto said they still have a few more albums in them yet.

I would have given the album a 9. My only gripe with the album is that there was a four year gap between it and the previous record. Some of the songs are quite simply outstanding. They should not bow out, they are still relevant and still have a lot to offer. There are at least a couple of more albums in them and I think they are still 'the' live act in the world today.

Jayzuz. Am amazed some of yiz actually managed to read it through to the end. Even so, if you think that the review was long, you should have seen the 1700 word version I originally wrote. Bloody ridiculous it was. Anyway, cheers for the feedback. As for the 7 out of 10 rating I stand by it 100%. Yeah, Binokular, I plan indeed to get out from behind the editor's, er, desk a bit more often. But as we all know here, life does be busy. Nontheless there might shortly be a U2-themed OpEd from me that builds on some stuff floated in the review. That's assuming I manage to (a) focus my frazzled brain long enough to write one and (b) it manages to pass muster with the good Reverend Jules. A tall order on both counts. And - for whatever it’s worth - no, I don't think the boys should throw in the towel just yet. I really do think their best album is still in them, but it just ain't gonna fall out of the sky. In the meantime roll on the 2005 tour. eoghan

Eoghan, I really hope your right about about U2s best album being yet to come. I suppose it might have been easy to say it was the right time to call it a day after "The Joshua Tree" and then they go pull "Achtung Baby" out of nowhere. I'd love to see them be that daring again.