2006 World Cup HD Schedule
The 2006 World Cup kicks off tomorrow at 11:55 a.m. EST, I know, I know, everyone knows that. With less than 24 hours to go, I thought it would be a good time to remind everyone of the HD schedule or the where and the when. While it is great news that all the games will be produced in HD, we all won't be able to enjoy them because of our own programming challenges. Here in the US the coverage is split between ESPN, ESPN2 and ABC, which are all owned by Disney. It has always been a mystery to us how they decide which network cover which event and the World Cup isn't any different. ESPN-HD is carried by many more companies than ESPN2-HD and ever since the launch of ESPN2-HD viewers everywhere have been crying; Why do they need two ESPN-HD channels when the first isn't full of HD? We am sure they have their reasons and we're pretty sure our best interests are not in mind. As a result soccer fans everywhere are going to be crying to their providers to carry ESPN2-HD, ahh now we see why they have 2.
As for the where and the when, head over to HDSportsguide.com for the full schedule here in the states and I know it isn't that popular in the states, but we are going to at least watch one game, if for no other reason than to comment on the production quality.
The first US game will be on ESPN2HD at 11:55 a.m. EST on June 12th 2006.
Filed under: Programming
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Big Sam @ Jun 8th 2006 12:02PM
I didn't even realize there was a ESPN2HD. I'm pretty sure Comcast Dallas doesn't carry it.
Julian @ Jun 8th 2006 2:00PM
Yeah seriously....not here in Philadelphia....Comcast's headquarters! When is Comcast gonna start adding some more HD channels? Half the good matches are on ESPN2 HD :(
Kevin Bolduan @ Jun 8th 2006 2:00PM
Dish Network carries it (though ESPN.com doesn't think so - I'd include a URL but espn.com has gone all Flash crazy on their schedule - yuck!). But in order to view it on Dish, you have to have one of their new MPEG4-capable receivers (622 or 211) which haven't been out very long at all.
The worst part about this is that when they're showing the game in HD on ESPN2-HD, there's only SD content on ESPN-HD. I've seen the folks in Bristol, CT flip a switch and have content from their various channels (ESPNEWS, ESPN2, ESPN) appear on the others, so it seems unlikely there's a technical issue here. Come on, ESPN, show the games on ESPN-HD!
Q @ Jun 8th 2006 5:11PM
I agree...this is complete crap...why not just put all the games on ESPNHD (all the ones that aren't on ABC). This makes no sense.
Paul Westbrook @ Jun 8th 2006 7:01PM
If you want to set your HD DIRECTV TiVo to record all World cup content in HD, create a keyword wishlist for "WORLD CUP" (Use pause for quotes), and category Audio/Visual/HD
Some guy from the industry @ Jun 10th 2006 9:18AM
Sure, it's not a technical issue - you think if they're getting video over from Germany, somehow we couldn't put it on whatever network we want? Indeed, it is just a matter of pushing some buttons.
But here's my take on it:
ESPN2 is not considered a lesser network. Most people aren't watching in HD to start, so just taking in number of households [SD] - ESPN2 is in over 90 million HH. ESPN is in something like 90.8M. Very little difference in people able to view the matches.
ESPN tries not to brand ESPN2 as a "lesser" or "spillover" network. [For example, all the tennis on ESPN2, the grand slam network] Why? One reason is to create value. If you only have a few events on it then cable companies will a) not be as likely to carry it and b) not see it as worth as much. So if they only used it when there was another event on ESPN, many fewer people would have it in the first place.
ESPN is thinking of the future, too, when pushing for distribution of ESPN2HD (and putting high-profile events on ESPN2 in HD is one way). More and more of their content is going to be HD in the coming years. If they don't get carriage now, it may be harder in the future. So in order to get on the cable/satellite systems, they're acting early.
That's my take on it, at least..
Disclaimer: My views are my own and not my employer's, who will remain nameless. Etc.