Disconcerting pitcher
 

B1 enters the batters box on the right side while the pitcher is in position ready to pitch. B1 disconcerts the pitcher by moving to the left -hand batter’s box.
Where in HS rule book is this addressed?
Do you allow the pitcher to reset and warn the head coach the next infraction will result in the batter be out?

In NFHS there is no warning ... batter is out.
(Assuming ready to pitch = pitcher is on the pitcher's plate.)
7-4-3, Art. 3

Also in USA. No judgment, just the move.

It may be prudent to allow the batter to become set in the batter's box first. That might include holding a hand up to signal the pitcher not to pitch. Once the batter is set, give a beckoning motion to the pitcher.

I've seen some pitchers who get the ball back from the catcher while standing on the pitcher's plate and they're ready to go. That might help from a pace of play perspective, but the batter has the right to get ready.

And the pitcher is still required to simulate taking a signal from the catcher. This is so there are no quick pitches.

Also, I assumed that "disconcerting" in the OP meant across the plate in front of the catcher with no time out and that the batter was apparently set.

Please clarify regarding the comments above.

B1 enters the batters box on the right side while the pitcher is in position ready to pitch.

That part seems pretty clear to me. YMMV

This is also a potential out in NCAA - 11.20.1 -- but it's a delayed dead ball.

I assume this means we let the pitcher throw one pitch, then give the defense the option of the batter is out; or the result of the play.

I know what some people on the board think about stupid NCAA rules, and I tend to disagree, but I'll be damned if this isn't a stupid NCAA rule IMO.

What's stupid about it?

The delayed dead ball?

The violation occurred prior to the pitch. Why continue play after a violation that had nothing to do with any further play?

NCAA recently changed all batter interference situations from an immediate dead ball to a delayed dead ball, so that it allows the defense to make a play more to its advantage. Suppose the catcher, despite the BI, is able to throw out a runner going from second to third. The defense would likely want the result of that play.

Maybe, maybe not. What if the batter does this as the pitcher already brings her hands together, and the pitcher is able to deliver the pitch?

My thought is that all INT should be an immediate dead ball. This isn't NBA basketball, we don't need continuation.

This sort of slippery slope leads to, "What if the batter punches the fielder in the face before she can catch the ball, and two runs score, but the defense retrieves the ball and gets the third out of the inning on a play at the plate to end the game?"

No, just NO. Say no to TWP situations. Make INT a dead ball again.

Also, the pitch doesn't start until the hands come apart. :D

Agree. A long time ago, in a place unknown, a coach thought he got robbed of a double play. The coaches make the rules and this is the result.

This is nothing new...in that other sport played with a smaller white ball. The delayed dead ball allows the defense to make a play on a runner and take the option of the play if it's to their benefit.

It's no different than umpire interference on a catcher's throw. Let it play out, and see if the defense is still able to retire the runner. If they do, why take that out away from them?

Yeah, I do think making this particular batter interference violation a delayed dead ball is rather strange, since the infraction would normally happen well before the pitch is delivered. Why wait?

Then again, I've always felt that an illegal pitch violation when a pitcher steps on the plate with her hands already together should be an immediate dead ball as well. Why wait for her to then separate her hands, look in for the signal, check her arm band, look back at her catcher, put her hands together, take a deep breath...