Running lane surprise ruling

[CecilOne]

No matter how much we hate or disagree about a rule, consistency makes life and umpiring better. If the ASA goes with the other two biggest rules bodies, that would enhance consistency.

Yes, I know most people don't see the logic of this interp. and making the call might provoke strong arguments, especially if the major rule books differ. The argument about whether throwing to 1st after a BB is a play is highly emotional, along whether a play is needed to interfere. Even if the rule said interfering with a play instead of a catch; the throw to 1st on a BB is a legitimate play to:
1) keep the BR there
2) decoy another runner
3) setup for an appeal of infractions like missed bases, abandonment, etc.
4) maybe even catcher thinking U3K instead of ball four
The issue is not whether any of us like the ruling or the idea or whatever, it's whether this is an accurate interp. of the rules as written.

No one likes the idea of giving the catcher leave to "peg" any runner, BB or not. That has to be eliminated as a judgement call by the umpire, just like judging that the runner actually interfered with the catch or it was uncatchable.