The Dismissal of Zak Starkey, the Drummer Bearing the Beatles' Legacy: Behind the Scenes of the Music World

Photo by Kubacheck, “Zak Starkey1.jpg”, via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 2.0 (changes made if applicable).

"Fired"—when you hear that, you usually imagine a breakdown in relationships or musical differences. But this story is a bit stranger, and in a way typical of modern rock bands, where "information fluctuations" have fueled the flames.

The main character is Zak Starkey. He is the son of The Beatles' drummer, Ringo Starr, and has been the touring drummer for The Who for nearly 30 years since 1996. In an interview with New York's rock station Q104.3, he spoke about his departure from the band, saying, "I'm still confused, and probably they are too," indicating a different tone from the public "breakup story." American Songwriter

The beginning was the night of the "debut"—the moment the song stopped

According to American Songwriter, the beginning was a charity performance for Teenage Cancer Trust held at London's Royal Albert Hall. During the band's "first live performance" of the 1971 song "The Song Is Over," frontman Roger Daltrey lost track of the song's entry and stopped the performance. The article states that Daltrey, who has hearing issues, complained that "the drums were too loud." American Songwriter

This "performance interruption" is symbolic. Even a legend like The Who stopped a "debut" performance. In today's world, where video clips can easily spread, that moment was captured and interpretations multiplied. "Age and hearing," "stage monitor environment," "lack of rehearsal," "drummer's volume"—all are possible, but none are definitive.

Fired→Reinstated→Fired again—the fact that explanations wavered became the "incident" itself

What fueled the confusion was that subsequent announcements were not consistent. The band announced their separation from Starkey in April, but three days later, it was reported that he was reinstated, with Pete Townshend citing "communication issues" as the reason for the initial exclusion. However, in May, another "departure" was announced, this time explained as "to focus on other musical activities." American Songwriter

However, Starkey himself denies that explanation. He claims, "I didn't leave of my own will," and stated on Instagram that he was asked by the band to issue a "resignation statement," but he didn't because it would be a lie. Instagram

This discrepancy, from an outsider's perspective, appears as a simple conflict of "who is telling the truth." However, when you line up the statements of those involved, it becomes more complicated. Entertainment Weekly reported that in a phone call with Daltrey, Starkey was told he was "retired" rather than "fired," highlighting how the choice of words can change perceptions. EW.com

In short, it wasn't a clean-cut "decision," but rather the announcements wavered, the nuances wavered, and the expressions of those involved wavered. This "wavering" is what is most incompatible with the social media era's tendency to ignite controversies.

The successor is Scott Devours—the tour moves toward its "final chapter"

Scott Devours, who has long played in Daltrey's solo band, took over as drummer after Starkey. He participated in the North American farewell tour "The Song Is Over Tour" following the Italy performance, as reported by American Songwriter. American Songwriter

The Guardian also reported on the flow of Starkey being notified of "a second dismissal within a month" and Townshend's social media posts, emphasizing the shock of a "change just before the farewell tour." The Guardian

What is important here is that it is not just a "personnel change" but is tied to the "final tour." For fans, it becomes a matter of "how it ends." The absence of a drummer of 29 years on the legendary band's last run—this stirs emotions.

Starkey chose "confusion" over "resentment"

So, is Starkey angry? At least in the interview quoted by American Songwriter, he emphasizes confusion over anger. He says, "I'm still friends with Roger," and "we haven't become enemies," adding, "They wanted to change, didn't want to change, wanted to change again... it's just confusing. They're confused, and I'm confused," summarizing with a touch of irony. American Songwriter
And what is decisive is his stance of "not intending to fill the friendship gap; this is 'band business.'" American Songwriter

This "pragmatism" appears as a mature response, yet for fans, it might amplify their frustration. "Is there no reason?" "What about an explanation?" "Is that okay for a contributor of 29 years?"—if questions remain, people will turn to social media for answers.

Social media reactions: Sympathy, anger, and realism in a three-way battle

This uproar seemed to divide social media reactions into three main types (the following is a summary of the "tendencies" of public posts and community reactions).

1) Support for Starkey: "Lack of respect for 29 years"
In The Who community on Reddit, Starkey's own claims ("I was asked to issue a resignation statement but refused") were quoted and shared, with voices expressing anger over the treatment of a contributor and lamenting the chaos of the replacement drama. Reddit

Additionally, NME's post (on X) saw reactions of "surprise and sadness" spreading, creating an atmosphere of shared "shock." X (formerly Twitter)

2) Band-side speculation: "If you can't hear, the scene is harsh," "Volume issues are real"
On the other hand, given that the origin was reportedly a situation where "the singer couldn't hear," some view that a "change" was necessary as a field decision. In fact, the official band side has made statements suggesting operational issues rather than conflict, such as "communication problems." Instagram

3) Evaluation of the successor and pragmatism: "More important than who plays is ensuring the tour goes on"
There was also a certain number of realistic views prioritizing "not stopping the farewell tour." A structure emerged where Townshend's statement, quoted by the media, spread, and agreement and opposition clashed (the statement itself is quoted by multiple media). Stereogum

The biggest reason for this three-way battle is probably "the explanation was not finalized." Billboard's description of the matter as "It's a mess" is symbolic, and from a fan's perspective, there is a sense of "entering the final chapter with low resolution." Billboard

The title of "son of a star" can be both a help and a curse

In Starkey's case, the fact that his father is Ringo is both a weapon for attracting attention and a mechanism that promotes dramatization. "The Beatles' blood," "the son of a legend," "dismissal from a legendary band"—these make strong headlines. Therefore, even slight fluctuations in information can expand into a huge narrative.

However, at least in this interview, Starkey seems to be trying to distance himself from "narrativization." He emphasizes friendship, denies resentment, and calmly states, "I really wanted to do it until the end, but I couldn't." American Songwriter

The history of rock is not short of dismissal dramas. However, the change that occurred at the very end remains for fans more as a matter of "courtesy" and "explanation" than a matter of "sound."

Next move: Starkey turns to "storyteller"

According to American Songwriter, Starkey is scheduled to hold a one-man show titled "Zak Starkey ... Who?" at the Gramercy Theatre in New York on February 20, 2026. It will be structured to talk about his career, perform, and include videos and guests. American Songwriter

In other words, he is moving towards "talking" rather than silence. The fact that the person involved in the confusion is moving towards the next expression using the confusion itself—this movement might become the "answer" to this uproar.

And what fans really want to know is probably not a judgment of who is right, but "an ending they can accept." Whether The Who's tour will extend into 2026 or come to a complete close, if there is another announcement, this time "unwavering words" will be required. American Songwriter