If a batter is called out for interference, it will be recorded as a put-out by the catcher and will go against the batter's batting average.
No, any type of interference is against the rule. It is similar to a pitcher unintentionally hitting a batter. As it is true that the interference does not have to be intentional, there are occasions where there might be "interference" that is not called as such. i.e If a batter takes a pitch and a runner is stealing a base, if the catcher throws the ball and hits the batter or his bat, while the batter is still standing in the box, this is not called interference
When the batter is standing on the plate.
Catcher's Interference is an Umpire's call due to the Catcher making some type of contact with either the batter or his bat during a pitch or does other actions to interfere with a batter's ability to hit the oncoming pitched ball however an Umpire can only call Catcher's Interference as long as the batter is in a legal position while in the batter's box and in the event of Catcher's Interference being called the batter is awarded first base automatically and the runners advanced only if forced to.
Yes, interference will be called if the umpire judges the catcher hindered the batter. If the ball is hit and the batter runner successfully reaches first and runners forced to advance or were stealing a base advanced the interference is ignored. If the batter runner is thrown out the manager has the option to accept the outcome of the play or accept the interference call placing the batter runner on first. If other runners are on base the manager's choice will affect them too. Accepting an interference call would require non-forced runners to return to their base. Consider a runner on third with no or one out when interference occurs. The batter runner is thrown out while the runner on third scores. Accepting the interference would require the runner scoring from third to return to third.
I was listening to a Tribe (Indians) game the other day, and that very thing happened. Apparently they awarded the batter a hit (or that might have been called ball 4, I'm not entirely sure which, but I THINK it was a hit. It's definitely not a strike. Rule 10:13(f) When an umpire awards the batter or any runner one or more bases because of interference or obstruction, charge the fielder who committed the interference or obstruction with one error, no matter how many bases the batter, or runner or runners, may advance In a 'catcher interference' call, the batter is awarded first base, and it is not an official 'at-bat', thus not counting in the batter's total 'at-bats' for the game. On "catcher interference", the batter is awarded first base, no official at-bat is charged (as it is notated in the box score as "'Joe Blow' awarded first base on catcher interference) and the catcher is charged an error.
Batter's interference is when the batter interferes with the catcher's ability to throw and catch a ball that is in play. An example of this is if the batter were to obstruct the catcher when a teammate is stealing a base, resulting in the catcher's inability to throw out the runner.
If the bat strikes the catcher's mitt, the rule is catcher's interference. The batter gains first.
Batted in, but its normally RBI - Runs Batted In
if the cathcer is too close, a cather interference, if the batter is too far back, a batter interference
returned to first because when the batter intefer with the catcher the play is normaily stop
Catcher's interference. If the batter's swing hits the catcher's mitt and then continues through and hits the ball into play. It's the manager's option to take the result of the play or accept the interference by awarding the batter 1st base.