But even IF we consider this to be not so clear on the rule, then still the build on level 14 is in neither of the theories what constitutes a delay tower okay, it both split and was nowhere close on the same line.
Spoiler!
Also there was a split on level 15, which, even if it was not intentional as claimed, should have been anticipated, since there already was a split on level 14. All in all, the play was just very sketchy and stretching the rules on purpose, it was not okay. Like Anda said, if someone wishes to make it a report who was in the game, feel free to do so.
Then regarding the vagueness of the rule. It seems like everything is stretched nowadays, and needs to be put in clear judicial terms. I find that a shame, I think with common sense we should be able to understand the rule, but apparently it needs to be spelled out in detail. However, we did rephrase the rule on delay towers, clearly constituting what we see as a delay tower. This is the definition we will follow when judging similar situations:
"'don't build more than 120 gold value delay towers. We consider towers a delay tower if they are built seperately of the main army, or if they do not fight with the main army within a few seconds on a lane that is not trying to hold without being forced by massing by the enemy"
We have added the clause of fighting 'within a few seconds', to prevent people building in such a way that their last unit comes in last second, which has the same effect as hazardous' TOT. We also added 'a lane that is not trying to hold', because it feels ridiculous that if someone somehow splits while trying to hold should be banned. Also, people should not be banned if splitting because of a massing send. If you have comments or suggestions to constitute 'delaying towers' better, let us know.