Batter acting like ball 4 on ball 3

Is it a bush play? Perhaps; depends on who you ask.
Is it illegal? No.

As soon as the batter dropped the bat and headed toward first the umpire should have said: "That's 3 balls batter"; ending any speculation.

This would only be a successful trick play if the defense, especially the catcher, is sleeping and allowed themselves to be tricked.

You could also penalize the batter with a strike for being out of the box and delaying the game in your judgment. Wouldn't that be fun?

Saw this happen, and led to one team winning, and another team losing. Southeast Regional semifinal game, I think for class A, extra innings, and bases loaded. Count was 3 balls, 1 strike, and 2 outs. Batter takes a low strike, thinks its ball 4, and starts to walk down the first base line. Runner on third is celebrating and basically walking home. The catcher is all depressed and pays no attention to the runner heading home, who scores, winning the game, and ending their season. It was one of the most insane games I have ever seen.

PP10

This is ironical. My son pitched tonight. There was a first and second, 2 balls on the batter. On ball 3 he trotted to first and the runners started jogging to second and third. Our coach was yelling to the catcher to throw the ball, the runner at second stopped near the second base bag, but the runner at first was stuck. He got back to the bag at first safe, but was almost thrown out. The irony is I started this thread thinking it might be a play that would work. It almost did tonight.

Back in my HS days (mid 70's), we pulled this 2-3 times a year. Worked every time. Double steal.

Catcher runs right at Batter jogging down the line to first and runs into him as he is attempting throw to second.
Batter out for interferance?

theEH,

That would be a real stretch.

If the defense was running this as a designed play, the batter and runners on base would be jogging. They wouldn't be giving any indication of attempting to steal in a normal fashion.

In your scenario the catcher has followed the batter to the first base side of the plate area and intentionally collided with him while throwing the ball. He would have no reason for running after the batter to begin with.

There is no way I would call the batter out for inteference the way it's described.

There's no way this "play" should ever work. The catcher should know the count, or at least assume he does, and make the throw to third. Score it Caught Stealing.

Throw it even if the count is 3-2. The catcher assumes he just caught the third strike (unless it's not even close) and makes the throw for the strikeout-throwout double play. No harm if he's wrong, big benefit if he's right.

The catcher has to take charge, and the 3B has to be alert.

Pilsner: I know, I just didn't Know how to Explain it properly.
I meant as the RT. handed batter leave's the box to go to first.
If Catcher is wise to there Ploy, Come's up throwing.
Batter's called out for interferance. Runner's have to return to previous Bag held.
Batter must stay in Batter's Box, are move away from Catcher. Correct?
What if Lf. handed batter left the batter's box, started toward
1st base and catcher tried a throw to first for a pick off, and the ball hit the batter??

theEH,

A bit more plausible this time.

True, if a right handed batter walked in front of the catcher and interfered with his throw to second base there is the likelihood of an interference call.

Your second scenario, regarding the left handed batter heading toward first, would probably be a "had to be there" thing.
If the batter was only a few steps away and the catcher just drilled him with the ball I could actually lean toward calling the catcher for doing something malicious. On the other hand, if he was actually trying to pick off the runner at first and I judged that the batter hindered his attempt in any way, an interference call would be warranted.

You guys must be more intelligent than those in the mid-atlantic; I've seen many times when one or both teams can't count to three outs, and you're wanting them to count all the way to four????!!!???
Tim Robertson

Correct me if I'm wrong but on batters interference the runner or runners stealing a base do not automatically get sent back to the base they occupied before the interference.I believe it is an umpires judgement call as to whether the base would have been stolen.Is that correct.

Not correct. No runner can advance on an interference by the batter. Any runners must return to the base occupied at the time of the pitch.

You may have this confused with obstruction by the catcher; i.e. when he obstructs the batter's attempt to hit the ball. In this case any runners attempting to advance by steal or a squeeze play will be awarded the base they are attempting. Other runners not attempting to advance are not entitled to the next base unless they are forced by the batter being awarded first base.