[LMan]

Once the ball has eluded F2, the batter has become an "offensive teammate" for purposes of determining interference - and, in effect, the bar has been raised to rule so (since the defense has erred). That standard does not require intent, but does require a "blatant and avoidable" action to rule INT.

Not saying this wasn't INT, but just that it is more difficult to properly rule INT on a 'offensive teammate' than a batter. But I will opine that a passed ball that rolls right behind the batter (who steps on it as he is attempting to back out of the box and clear the play) will not get an INT call from me unless the kid obviously kicks at the ball or makes a more overt action.