All of this is assuming that the situation does not qualify as
"directly after a turnover."
"XIV.A.2 . . . However, directly after a turnover or when putting the
pull into play the stall may not be initiated before a pivot is
established . . ."
I think the stronger argument is against the marker being allowed to
stall. And I think it's a ot stronger. Turnover just occurred,
fouled player gains possession at the spot, no play has occurred since
the turnover. At minimum the issue has not been resolved. In the
meantime, I think the reasonable way to play it is not to stall. A
few of my reasons:
1) That's what the rules tell you to do, by the most reasonable
interpretation.
2) That's what is consistent with other analogous situations.
3) That's what is fair, based on the uncontested foul.
4) That's what doesn't arbitrarily create a defensive advantage based
on the location of an uncontested foul.
5) There's no compelling justification for stalling.
-Colin