I emailed Carl about this play, questioning
both whether an appeal can legally be made and whether the force was removed.
His answer:
This is left over from Jaksa/Roder. It's one of the few "interps" of their I keep. An umpire must have some logical underpinning for decisions he makes where the rules are ambiguous. While I've generally removed all influence of J/R from the BRD, this one seemed so logical I couldn't throw it out. What you say, though, is pertinent. You might come up with some other treatment. If you do, I suggest you use 9.01c as your citation.