Situation #2

[SRW]

From ASA's Rule Clarifications for March:

SITUATION 2: With one out, R1 on 3B and R2 on 1B, B4 has a 0-1 count and on the next pitch R2 attempts to steal 2B. The throw is cut-off by F6 as R1 now attempts to steal home. F6’s throw to home plate strikes B4 who is standing out of the box preventing F2 from catching the ball and applying a tag on R1. RULING: B4 is guilty of interference. The ball is dead, B4 is out, R1 is returned to 3B and R2 is returned to 1B. (Rule 8, Section 2 F [3])

In this situation, I'm proposing that Rule 7 should apply here, not Rule 8. To go a step forward, I could apply 2 separate rules and have two distinctly separate rulings!

First: The way the situation is written, the NUS has stated that Rule 8 is the rule reference, which means they assume B4 has now become a BR. However, the situation never states that B4 became a BR; and in fact, takes it one step beyond by stating that R2 attempted to steal 2B. If B4 had become a BR, then R2 would be advancing, not stealing. Therefore I propose that B4 never became a BR. B4 is still a batter, and Rule 8.2.F.3 does not apply.

Second: If B4 is a batter (and not a BR), then Rule 7 applies. Specifically, there are 2 rules an umpire could apply here: 7.6.R or 7.6.S. Rule 7.6.R allows for the umpire to judge intent. Rule 7.6.S doesn't. So on this play, I could have a dead ball-out, or I could have a safe. It all depends on which rule I want to apply, and how it's applied.

Thoughts? Am I missing something here?