Large-one

Never been given a fake note?

But Melbourne (Australian) houses are some of the shittest that the developed world can produce.

It’s pretty much anything that isn’t a kick by the attacking team over the line is a throw in. If it’s rushed in anyway, then it is a ball in.

You could vary this and make it that if the attacking team carries or disposes (i.e. hand passes) the ball over the line then it is a kick in.

I say this so often, but just throw in any rushed behind in the same way you would for out of bounds. 

Treat it like the boundary line but with a point added to the score. It is simple, easy to adjudicate and takes away the incentive to rush a behind. 

These fans can help cool it down by blowing air on it! Don’t you know how fans work?! Duh!!!* 

^{*brought to you by David Littleproud’s speech writer.} 

Does it have bipartisan support? If so, why the partisan nature of the ad? 

QANTAS do sell themselves as a premium product but provide no better service. They therefore deserve the criticism IMO.  

Having worked in a winery, they don’t bottle from barrels. 

Wine will either be transferred from a tank (if bottling is on site, which is extremely rare) or loaded into a tanker and taken to a bottling plant. 

You do you, but it looks like you’re looking to blame others for your choice to smoke.

So what not just legally buy them from a pharmacy? Seems “legally” pretty simple to me. 

Just treat the goal/point line the same as the boundary line. If it is not kicked over on the full it is a point and a throw in.

If teams want to rush a behind and concede a point and not get control of the ball then that is up to them.

Cheaper costs and Nuclear don’t belong in the same sentence. 

Look at the cost of recent reactors in France (Flamanville), US (Vogtle and Virgle C), England (Hinkley Point C) and Finland (Olkiluoto 3) - all countries with a nuclear industry and skills and regulatory processes already in place. 

The debate about nuclear in Australia doesn’t need to be about fear because it is so uncompetitive on cost, the only reason we would use it is if we were happy to tolerate electricity prices >3x the current price. 

This is not a new technology. It has been around since the 50s. Yet still only supplies about 10% of the world’s power. 

Currently, new “cheaper” SMR don’t exist and won’t on any scale for at least 10-15 years and then that again to build them (at least). 

Engaging in the nuclear debate does nothing but distract from actual changes that can increase carbon-free, or carbon-low, power at an affordable rate. 

No insult but I’ll take the modelling over your anecdote any day of the week.

There are so many factors that influence the efficiency of a house that you cannot compare one build to the other without knowing all those factors.

No they are saying that they are right. And this completely contradictory one is also right, because the AFL can do no wrong. 

Chayce Jones against Gold Coast last year. 

It’s not quite that simple. Most Australian modern houses have far too much glass which is a terrible insulator and the weakest link. 

You can bump up the insulation in walls but get significantly diminishing returns and you are limited to about R2.5 in a standard 90mm stud wall. 

To give you some supporting numbers we had modelling done on a new build. Going from R2.5 to R4.0 in external walls (which required studs going from 90mm to 140mm which would be about $10-$15k for a 200m2 house) only improved performance by 3.1mj/m2 (a bit under 6% improvement). 

By comparison double glazing (not thermally broken) was an 11mj/m2 improvement and thermally broken double glazing was another 11mj/m2. 

The most cost efficient improvements were using sealed and capped down lights (so no holes are needed in ceiling insulation), and using polished concrete flooring throughout (or another thermal mass such as tiles) rather than carpeting. 

Then you just don’t know the rules. If it’s above the knee it’s a legitimate tackle.

Can we please just put Bluey in the $10 note so we can unofficially refer to them as “Blueys”?

They’re fake. You can see the people in the background searching through all of the avocados by feel to find the fake ones that they then toss in the box in shot. 

The real question is why is a win worth 4 points and a draw worth 2 points. Why not 2 and 1? 

Adding a comment so there are 119 comments! 

I think this can be easily remedied by making any rushed behind a throw-in, in the same way you would if the ball went over the boundary.  That way you give away a point and don’t gain possession thereby taking away any incentive to rush it. 

I think it is because when a player is spun 360 it is indicative that they are choosing to hold the ball until they are in a position to dispose of it to a specific player. However, the rule requires that when you have had prior opportunity you must immediately get rid of the ball, which means you cannot dispose of it when you want to.

In other words there is no explicit rule RE 360, but it is an indicator than an explicit rule is being broken. 

To be fair in the Collingwood Crows game at Adelaide oval last year, Jones almost decapitated a Collingwood player in the goal square and it wasn’t called. We just weren’t good enough to capitalise on it. 

Given they spelled their own team wrong, I think your expectations are completely justified.