What I meant was that the logic that ART 1 and 2 are somehow is very thin at best. The way I read it is that you have two different instances of how the bench area are defined.

It's how a logical data set or rules would be organized. In this case Art 1 and 2 both refer to BENCH AREA as that is the specific header. I would read that as what they are and not think that much more.

I think the point is that what you just said is a completely reasonable way to look at it, which gives you one answer.

Then there's another completely reasonable way to look at it (Art 1 specifically says "Bench Area"; Art 2 describes the "invisible area" used at certain times... to me, describing a time where the "Bench Area" is not used) which leads to the opposite answer.

I think it's also why 5-13(?) doesn't just say "During a TO, a team shall be in its Bench Area" and instead repeats the description of the area.

Hmm, I see your frustration now, Bob. Thanks for making me second guess myself! ;)

Gotta love how a question such as this makes you scratch your head so much. Once we find out the true answer from the NCAA in a couple of weeks we will never forget it!

Let me try this:

TO is granted. A1 and B1 get in a scuffle 8 feet on the floor directly in front of the A bench. Two A team members get up from their seats and approach the scuffle.

Have they "left the bench area when a fight may break out?" 10-4.8 (NCAAW) or 10-6.1.j (NCAAM)?