[SAump]

I still maintain that the batter had not committed interference by his actions after the third strike.

But for the sake of discussion, let us allow that he did commit interference. He is out, but he is already out. So now R1 is out because the umpire decides that is where the runner being played against declared out. Everything is peachy.

But now we already have an out on the runner who was played against and has also been legally declared out, and there was no further play.

7.09f(?) states that "if no other runner is being played against, it is interference without play - the ball is dead and runners must remain at their last legally touched base."

R3 breaks for home on the pitch, score the run, two outs. R3 breaks for home on the catch, return to third, two outs. That is the smallest difference, but it affects my ruling on the play.