The OP is very similar to the play in FED where a retired batter (by virtue of an uncaught third strike where she is not allowed to advance to first since there's a runner already occupying it) runs to first base anyway and hinders a throw being made back to first base to pickoff the runner diving back. It's specifically covered in a case play (8.6.18.C) in the 2013 FED case book.

Sounds like ASA would treat this play differently.

I would rule the same in ASA; in that play, it isn't a batter-runner, a runner, or anyone that ever had the right or obligation to run. It is a retired batter that has just one responsibility remaining; to NOT interfere with a play or attempted play.

So why would the OP be different? Is it because the pitch was batted, giving the batter the opportunity to advance even though it was foul?

The OP has one enormous difference... the play you refer to is interference on someone who was put out, and then took an action which put them in the way. The OP, the player is put out, but she does not then take a new action that puts her in the way.

Mike,

Very well said, BS, from TWC is hard to understand. Thank you.:D