Yes I get that.
Equally surely they cannot support the proposition that fuel exhaustion will lead to a safe/safer outcome??
As an earlier post said in regulatory talk/think they'd be happier for the aircraft to run out of fuel and crash rather than end up safely on a runway having broken minima's.
MIN FUEL call made - check. MAYDAY FUEL call made - check. Aircraft runs out of fuel, crashes and people die - well what more could the Flight Crew have done??
To finish it off - sure MAYDAY FUEL would count as one of those "Land ASAP" situations.
So: an airport you are presently holding over Vs an airport you MAY not have the fuel to get to; perhaps the regulator in their wisdom would like to publicly nominate which THEY think would be more suitable and why??
Wonder if the passengers on board would agree!