WEEKLY WHINE

Kicks for clicks

Will the Internet be the only way to watch television in the future?

If so, we may finally have found a way to get our children off the couch.

Yes, last weekend, two 2010 Men’s World Cup qualifiers were broadcast online rather than on television. In the UK, the Ukraine-England match was available only to individuals who paid up to GB£12 to view the streaming video, whilst in the US, the Honduras-US match was available only to business establishments who paid upward of US$1,000 to show the streaming video and take cover charges from individuals.

UK viewers apparently gave the match a miss, whilst US supporters were treated to a feed of middling quality that was lost numerous times. So if this is the future of television, the future appears to be under construction.

Comments from the general public have ranged from “Yays we could watch that match” to “WTF we could barely watch that match”. Comments in the GoobNet Mailbox were much the same, but with even worse grammar. So don your body armor as we open up the GoobNet Mailbox to see what you, the ordinary people, thought about these matches and their respective viewing experiences.

We had nearly half a million people viewing this match. It was a great success for us here at Kentaro.

– Sean Pierston
London, England, UK

Maybe, but it doesn’t matter whether it was a success for you. Was it a success for the public?

I was pleased with the Internet coverage of England’s match today. Keeping in mind that the result was meaningless for us, we got to see the entire match, and an occasional blockiness did not subtract from the overall experience.

– Jon A Yeltner
Cheltenham, England, UK

You sound like one of the people who paid only GB£5.

Viewing this match was an ordeal. It was difficult to find the correct site to register, it required creating a Paypal account, and the quality was nowhere near what we normally see on television. If any future matches are to be shown in this way, I would not pay for them.

– Clarence Whitworth
Sheffield, England, UK

You sound like one of the people who paid GB£12.

I watched the Ukraine-England match in a cinema. It was just like watching it in a pub, but with better seats and no alcohol. I would recommend this route for future matches.

– Shelley Winterspoon
Greenwich, England, UK

That’s interesting. Most people naturally gravitate toward pubs when they want to watch football matches, but could cinemas become match viewing locations? Perhaps only for families.

I am currently not in a position to analyse why this match was available only in bars, or whether it was technically successful. We qualified! Nothing else matters!

– Steve Abscond
Fremont, CA, USA

That is why the US faithful are not as outraged about this situation as they should be.

I think I should be outraged about this situation with the Honduras match, but I’m not. It was a fantastic match, and I watched it with about two hundred other US supporters, all of whom went crazy when Landon scored that awesome free kick. What could be better?

– Sam Parker
Chicago, IL, USA

Making the match available to those under 21 could have been better.

While the match was of course a great one for the USA, the feed itself left much to be desired. It froze numerous times, and it was lost completely for a few minutes in the first half. Replays were shown constantly, to the extent that after every goal, at least a minute of action was missed. Also, after one foul, a replay was shown after the restart had already been taken. On the whole, a lot of bugs still to be worked out.

– Miguel Santos
Carson, CA, USA

We here at GoobNet agree that the poorly timed replays were the worst thing about the broadcast.

I am starting a campaign to have all US Soccer games broadcast on all channels. Please visit my blog at http://#################.blogspot.com/ to join me and help ensure that all games are on all channels. Thank you.

– Ricardo Beem
Placenta, CA, USA

Go away.