Get Plus

Sign in to baba News

One account across the web, iPhone and Android — your subscription follows it.

or use an email code

Search stories

Type at least two characters. Results come from every newsroom baba reads.

↑↓ to move · ↵ to open · esc to close

Sign in to baba News

Sign in to keep asking. News Plus removes the daily limit.

or use an email code

N12Security

AI Judge Rules Beitar Jerusalem Should Have Received Penalty

Translated & summarized from N12 by baba

CenterNeutral tone

Hebrew · 2 newsrooms covering

An AI referee has ruled that Beitar Jerusalem was denied a penalty kick in a match against Tiberias. The AI determined with 95% certainty that a foul by David Kaltenis on Omer Atzili in the penalty area warranted a penalty and a yellow card. The on-field referee and VAR did not call a penalty on the play. The AI was trained on FIFA rules to provide objective assessments of such incidents.

The story in 5 lines · by baba

  • AI referee determined Beitar Jerusalem was wrongly denied a penalty kick.
  • AI concluded with 95% certainty a foul occurred in the penalty area.
  • The AI also recommended a yellow card for the foul.
  • Omer Atzili fell after contact with David Kaltenis in the box.
  • The on-field referee and VAR did not intervene on the play.
AI Judge Rules Beitar Jerusalem Should Have Received Penalty
Editorial illustration generated by baba News, not a photograph of the event.

An artificial intelligence referee has determined that Beitar Jerusalem was wrongly denied a penalty kick during a recent match against Tiberias. The AI, trained on FIFA rules and tested on various scenarios, concluded with 95% certainty that a foul occurred in the penalty area when player Omer Atzili fell after contact with defender David Kaltenis. The AI also recommended a yellow card for the foul.

The incident in question involved Atzili entering the box with the ball, where he made contact with Kaltenis, leading to his fall. Beitar Jerusalem players and staff argued for a penalty, but the on-field referee, David Foxman, and the VAR team did not intervene, allowing play to continue.

The AI's analysis explained that the defender's action constituted a clear foul, as he made contact with the attacker's leg while attempting to play the ball, preventing a clear scoring opportunity. The AI's assessment stated, "The referee's decision to continue the game is incorrect, as a clear foul occurred inside the box that required a penalty kick and a yellow card."

The AI system was developed to provide an objective opinion on such plays, learning FIFA's rulebook and undergoing training with numerous test cases to ensure its rulings align with established football regulations and on-field context.

N12Centre · Neve Ilan

Sign in to baba News

Sign in to follow newsrooms, topics and people.

or use an email code

Sign in to baba News

Sign in to follow newsrooms, topics and people.

or use an email code

Mentioned

Full coverage · 3 outlets
First: Sport5 · 1h ago

The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.

Related stories · 4

Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.

Open the Wire