Now I see where you were going.
Read case 10.3.6, noting that rule 10-3-6 covers unsporting acts.

No, we're not really disagreeing as to what contact is. i believe that any official even moderately rules cognizant knows what contact is and that that contact refers to physical contact. So actually we were telling you that you are complwetely wrong by rule

We're all (as in a whole bunch of us) pointing out to you that the specific statement you made the we couldn't call a technical foul because the ball was live is completely wrong by rule.

When you say you can "see our point", does that mean that you're still insisting that it has to be a personal foul of some kind because the ball was live even though you can NEVER have a personal foul without contact by rules definition? Or is that a very well disguised admission that you were completely wrong in your understanding of the rules? Just trying to clarify where you stand now.

JR:

A1 is holding a live ball. B1 has a LGP against A1 just short of contact. A1, while holding the ball, shoves B1 in the chest, and displaces B1. What say you?

MTD, Sr.

I say T. I know we've gone round and round with this one in the past.

Just to clarify, the difference between this and the OP is that in your play, the player is holding the ball the whole time whereas in the OP, the ball is thrown.

What made contact? The ball or A1?

No brainer by rule. Unsporting technical foul.

I say, even though the ball contacted him, since it was still in A1's hands, it is illegal offensive contact by A1. He didn't throw it, he held it and shoved it, fully controlling the contact. PC.....

And if a defender on a throw-in reaches through the plane and contacts the ball in the thrower's hands, using similar logic you'd also call a personal foul on the defender because the defender fully controlled the contact with the ball?

what's the difference with that and the situation where A1 deliberately throws the ball at B1's face? Are you saying using similar logic that should be a personal foul also because A1 controlled the contact?

In your example, the defender initiated the contact with the ball, and by rule that is a technical foul. Also, the way I read it, A1 didn't throw (but held, and that is a big difference) the ball, and he shoved B1 with the ball. I see that as a offensive push. I may be wrong (have been before), but I can't see me showing the big "T" sign and banging that as a technical. An easier (and correct sell, I think) call is the PC Push....Again, I may be wrong, but that is my take....open for instruction, as always....

In both situations, contact is made with the ball. While our instincts may tell us it makes a difference if the player is still holding it, the rules don't really give us that distinction.

Since, in the case of MTD's play, the least you would go is intentional anyway, the only differences are:
1. anyone can shoot.
2. spot of the throw-in.
3. the offender will have one T towards DQ.

No way you go with a PC here. Even if you want to call a personal foul, you need to go intentional or nothing.

Let me add this:
If the call is an intentional personal foul, then you should call a PC foul if the ball handler does the same thing inadvertently. I don't think anyone would even consider this. Would you call a foul on the defender who blocks a shot or pass and pushes the ball with such force that it knocks the ball handler to the floor?
The fact is the infraction is unsporting in nature.

I never said that a technical could not be called during a live ball.....I was referring only to a contact foul during a live ball.
I was assuming that throwing a ball at someone could be construed as "contact". I stand corrected.;)

What's the difference if the ball is the only thing that makes contact with an opponent if the ball is thrown or held? In both cases, isn't the only contact on the play being made by the ball, whether the ball was thrown or held? And we already know as per case book play 10.3.6SitB that a thrown ball making contact with an opponent's face is a technical foul for an unsporting act.

My instruction is to try and find a rule that will allow you to call a personal foul when there is no physical contact by the player committing that personal foul. The definition of a personal foul as per 4-19-1 is that it's illegal contact with an opponent while the ball is live. In the play being discussed, the thrower never contacted his opponent; the ball did. And that holds true whether the ball is held or thrown.

To be fair, you didn't add that caveat (contact) in your initial post.

Well again, I am willing to learn. But question? When the dribbler uses his forearm to push the guard away, that is a PC. I still think the ball in is hand being used to push the guard away is the same as though it were his hand or arm, and constitutes illegal contact by the dribbler. A PC call.I grant you that the contact by the ball muddies the water, but (in your mind...see it...see it...) can you see yourself calling this push with the ball as a Technical foul? I sure can't...and the fact that he has used the ball to do the pushing doesn't make it a non-contact foul. Throwing it, yes....holding it and pushing, no.....Am I alone in this interpretation? If so, I repent and will change my views......Thanks for the good input.....

How can it be the same when in one situation the contact is with the forearm and in the other situation the contact is with the ball?

How do you explain the situation on a throw-in where a defender reaches over the plane of the line and (1) contacts the ball, or (2) contacts the player? Same concept during a live ball, isn't it? And the rules are consistent too. Contact with the thrower is a personal foul. Contact with the ball is a technical foul. And note the ball hasn't been thrown in that situation either; the thrower is still holding it.

The problem is that we can't think. We have to use the available rules. And I'm not aware of any rule extant that would allow any official to call a personal foul without the player being called for the foul making physical contact with some part of his body on the opponent that he fouled. If someone can cite me a rule instead of an opinion though to the contrary, I'm willing to learn also.