Again, preface by had to be there and see the timing etc. but...I know contact isn't required and I do understand the rule, but I still disagree with your interpretation. When the defense is given every opportunity to make a play and chooses the only path that would result in hitting the runner (who has not left her direct path to the base) I'm not rewarding that. I'd argue the runner puts herself at more liability of interference by diverting to the right or left and guessing wrong. You seem to think that simply being hit by a throw is grounds for interference, which is not true in any rule set.The way you are interpreting it seems to require contact, which is no part of the rule. It also seems to only involve the opportunity for the defense to make the throw, not make the play, which is both the throw and the catch. If it helps, look at it this way, the runner interfered with the 1B chance to catch the ball. Either way, since the ball HIT THE RUNNER, it is a very simple call as long as there is any chance for the ball to have ben caught.