I don't think its there to predict the winner of a game and the margin to within a definite accuracy.



What I think it is trying to highlight is little things which happen in a game, changing the momentum of how the game is going. Taking all those stats we look at after the game and applying them in real time. Looking for sides playing the ball in the opposition half more and stuff, things which aren't always obvious to the observer during the game. Teams having back to back sets has a longer term effect than the outcome of those individual sets.



If its true that the scores are put into the system during the game then I'm very interested in it, and it looks quite good. Its been pretty close on both occassions.



I'd have been interested if they'd have had something similar during the England RU game

My mate used to think his sat nav was always spot on at predicting the time for a journey, it was always correct when he arrived. I had to point out to him that the sat nav revised it's predicted arrival time as we went along, so of course it was right when we we arrived at our destination.



It's not much good to have a device that predicts the final score that's only roughly accurate by the time the match finishes

Bad typo on my last post. I meant to put that I'd be interested if they DIDN'T put the scores in. Its quite impressive if that's the case

If this version of the swing-o-meter actually worked then the amusing result would be somewhat ironic in that Clarke & Co should be out of a job as there would be no need for pundits!

There is nothing new in this sort of technology - Hughie Green had a clap-o-meter that uncannily predicted the result of the weekly vote seven days before it was known simply by analysing the studio audience applauding - YouTube it, I haven't seen Clarkes Margin Meter but I'll bet its Hughie Greens Clap-o-Meter with a fresh coat of paint.

So far it has performed with all the apparent accuracy of a broken clock, correct twice a game rather than twice a day.



I didn't think it was possible to create something so inherently stoopid that 'Stevo' is beginning to sound sensible by comparison. Hats off to Sky.



In fairness it's opening prediction (according to Clarke - no graphics to back it up) early into Saturday's match weren't that far off come full-time ..... just a pity it lost faith it's own assessment five minutes later.

Tweeking? It wants binning

Not yet. We could potentially have weeks of fun at Clarke's expence first. If nothing else it has highlighted statistics can only take you so far but most sane followers knew that already.



After this weekend's embarrassing debut I have a feeling it'll be dropped in favour of good old-fashioned opinion from one of the many former SL players/coaches on the Sky team who might actually have a clue what's going on out there. There appears to be enough of them finding their way on to the team.

Clarke is like Peter Snow and his Swingometer, a needless distraction.

Also, I just wish the commentators/pundits et al would all shut the feck up as Mrs Brown would say. The way some of them stare into the camera like they are talking about the National deficit is very disconcerting.

Overall, I am glad Super League is back on Sky though

how old and ill does phil clarke look

Why? because something that is built up using data from hundreds of games didn't predict the exact score in 1 or 2 games.



What it needs is an explanation of what its trying to show and how it goes about working it out (in laymans terms)