[BoomerSooner]

I tried to analyze this from two different perspectives in an effort to reconcile the practical with the logical/theoretical. That said, here is what I thought about it:

Practical Perspective: The umpire made the call that we are trained to make based on the location of the runner. While there was discussion about it being a judgement call, the reality of the situation is that the rule regarding the running lane is effectively designed to eliminate the judgement aspect of the call or at least to provide a strong guide or out for umpires to make the call. From this perspective, absolutely the right call. It's the call I'd make in every time if I were in that situation because it is how we're trained and what is expected.

Logical Perspective: The other side of this is that with the benefit of replay (I know it isn't reviewable by rule), I felt the runner was definitely in his last stride toward the bag and the throw would have taken the fielder's glove into the runner regardless of where the runner had been short of sliding (which certainly isn't required). Essentially, my argument is that the call of interference in this situation was based on the position of the runner during the 43.5 feet prior to when he actually contacted the fielder's glove. I don't believe the runner's position at any time prior to that final stride (during which the runner is allowed to exit the running lane) obstructed, hindered, impeded or confused either the pitcher's throw or the first basemen's attempt to catch the throw.

All of that said, I realize my second point doesn't impact how we call games, but it is certainly another way of looking at it and how I'm thinking most people without training/experience viewed the play.