[AtlUmpSteve]

Playing devil's advocate here, are we all sure there is a call to be made??

To be interference, there must be a play that is interfered with. The person involved says there was no play.

To be a blocked ball (thus dead), the ball must be handled by someone not in the game, or touch offensive equipment left on the field, or similar. The on deck batter IS permitted on the field, WAS doing an approved function, and an errant throw hits him. How is this different than an errant throw hitting a base coach; the ball remains live when that happens, UNLESS the coach fails the same charge, to not interfere??

Based on the description of the play, and if I were in agreement on the field, the ball hitting the on-deck batter likely was advantageous to the defense. I submit that I could certainly accept a "no call", and ball remaining live, as an acceptable ruling based on those judgments.