Scott,

I disagree that two outs should have been called in this case. The rules only support the runner being out and the batter, or other runner, if the interferences was willful and intentional to prevent a double play. In this case, there was no intent to interfer.

Whether the ball was fair or foul, my inclination would be (in hindsight) to have R1 out for interference. If the ball is fair but uncaught, kill the play and place B3 on 1B. If the ball is foul, place B3 back in the box with one more strike. If the ball is caught fair or fould, despite the interference, then I would have two outs.

Leo