Interference? Or, no call?

[CecilOne]

I agree that it comes down to whether F6 had a chance. If a "hard shot" means that the ball was almost to F6 before deflecting, the 3' or 5' might be the difference between having a chance or not. So, either because of distance or timing of the deflection; F6 having a chance requires visualization of what would have happened w/o R2, that is, would F6 been able to reach the ball in time for a play if no runner was there.

Reading the OP, I could see an interference possibility, but only if really obvious that F6 had a play.

[SRW]

Did the runner impede, hinder, or confuse the fielder from making a play? Is contact necessary?

[Steve M]

WMB said "My thought process was that I did not know IF F6 would go to her left. I didn't know if her brain said "stop, there is someone there." If she had at least taken a step and put R2 between her and the ball, I would have called interference. Obviously, if there had been any contact it would have been an almost automatic call. The most action I saw was that she turned left, but never took a step.

Did she not go left because of R2? Or did she not even have a chance at the ball, which skidded away from her like a rocket?"

My thought process is a bit different. I expect that fielder to make the play. If the fielder gets intimidated by a runner, that's a dumb move fielder. If the fielder did not go left, it is because the fielder felt she did not have a chance at the ball. 16&U, in a championship game should be a fairly well schooled and skilled player. I have no call on the play that was given. That runner did not actively interfere - the description sounds like she did exactly what a runner is supposed to do - that too sez no call.