Is there a reason I still feel compelled to spend an hour every Sunday watching “The Sopranos”? The mediocre seasons now outweigh the good ones 2-to-1.

I don’t know why the show has plummeted. Hubris? Boredom? Creative drought? What I do know is that the show’s vitality died with Pussy Bompensiero and Tony’s mom. Since then, there’s been a laundry list of characters brought in and then killed off, often in the same episode. The shows have had nothing but dead ends (what happened to the Russians? Furio?) and indulge in episodes about Christopher Columbus. Huh?

Worse, they’re repeating things they’ve already done. In season two, Pussy Bompensiero is seen in a far-flung party store with an FBI informant. This season, Vito’s seen in a gay bar dressed in a biker outfit. Artie already fell in love with the hostess (Adriana) who is mobbed up, yet he does it again? And why is Chris still pursuing his Hollywood dreams? Because it makes sense for the character, or because it allows the show’s writers to take pot-shots at the industry.

It’s still better than most television, but this explains why I don’t watch much tv. I can’t wait for “Deadwood” to start in June. Unless they ruin that, too.

There’s some controversy about how Tottenham scored their goal against Ars*nal this weekend. My take on it explains 1) why it’s utter nonsense, and 2) why I (and you) should hate Ars*nal. But I’m going to stick it below because it could get long.

So the situation is this: for a long time, it has been common practice to kick the ball out of play if an opponent goes down injured. There’s a bad clash and a player has suffered a serious injury—Team A kicks the ball out so the player can get treatment. After the player has been tended to, Team B gives it back to Team A, usually by cranking it down the field. So Team A is “rewarded” for sportsmanship by Team B willingly giving up possession, but Team A has to basically start their attack over.

This bit of sportsmanship has been eroding for quite some time. If you had to say, “It died right here,” it would be in the first leg of the Barcelona–Chelski match in the Champions League. Like it or not, diving and play-acting reigns supreme in the modern game. Players hit the floor and stay there, writhing in pain, regardless of whether they’re really hurt. Why? Tactical advantage. Winning a free kick in a dangerous area. Getting a player carded or sent off.

The newest trend, however, is to stay down in order to kill an advantage. Players stay down to put pressure on the opposition to kick the ball out of play out of, you know, sportsmanship. So it’s ironic the cheaters claim “cheat” if the opposition doesn’t kick the ball out.

In fairness, this isn’t what happened on Saturday but that’s irrelevant. A quick move by Tottenham got the ball out to the wing and two Ars*nal players collided going for the ball and went down. The Spurs player hesitated but as both players on the turf rolled around. He looked to the ref, who doesn’t stop the game. The Spurs player passes the ball down the sideline and a few seconds later it’s crossed into the box for the striker to sidefoot it home, 1-0 Tottenham.

Highbury erupts in rage. Cheats! Scandal! Dirty bastards! The managers exchange words. Etc. Quick question: was either of the Ars*nal players “injured” badly enough to be substituted? No. Was either of the players “injured” enough to even receive treatment? Perhaps a swabbing with a cold sponge? Even a limp to the sidelines to walk it off? Critically, the answer to all of these is no.

The idea of kicking the ball out comes from the standpoint of player safety, not surrendering an unfair advantage. If a player slips and is out of position teams don’t kick the ball out. Had the two players collided and weren’t moving, the situation would be different. Bu