well, I'll try once more?
Ok, I'll try once more to explain what I mean. I honestly think this is the sort of thing where we would all understand each other's points of view if we were on a mat for 5-10 minutes.
I think some of the problem is the word "kata". So I'll use a different word, "introduction phase" instead (stealing language from Matt Thornton).
In the introduction phase, everything is defined. We arbitrarily assign the role of uke to one person, and the role of nage to another. We instruct uke to launch a specific attack, say yokomen, to a specific target, say nage's side of the head. We instruct nage to respond to this attack with the technique ikkyo.
Now, it's very easy for nage to not get hit in the side of the head. Nage can take both hands, cup the back of their head just above the ears, interlock their fingers and point their elbows straight in front of their face. Nage's forearms now protect the side of their head, so any attack will hit their forearm and not their head. .... (Yes, this creates other problems, but just a second)
Now, uke can very easily deny ikkyo to nage. As soon as uke strikes they can deliberately fall on their back before nage can even respond to the strike (action is faster than reaction). No ikkyo there.
Both of these behaviors are easy to do, take virtually no training, and make the exercise completely pointless. Of course if nage covers up uke could attack in another method to another target. Of course if uke is lying on their back nage has other options. All 100% true. But by exercising any of those "what ifs" we leave the introduction phase and we are now training in another manner (no value judgements, it's just a different training atmosphere).
In the introduction phase, I believe it is a poor use of resources to talk about timing (or resistance, or counters, etc....) because of the nature of the introduction phase. (I'm not saying timing doesn't exist in the introduction phase. I would say timing is present, but greatly skewed.) I believe the introduction phase is good for (probably vital for) introducing a new technique or skill. That's it. That's my point. Does that make sense?