Is Pretending You Accidentally Touch Moved Allowed in OTB?

Probably not the best place to ask this, but I might as well.
Suppose I'm playing in a tournament game, with black in this position after 8.a3:
lichess.org/study/wXXqEoDd/ZZ0Qzcxb#15
And I act like I want to move the g6 knight somewhere, reach my hand out for the knight, but grab the f6 knight instead. It's pinned to the queen, and if it was an honest mistake I would be banging my head in frustration because I supposedly touched the wrong piece and am forced to move it because of touch-move. After about 30 seconds I grab the knight and take the e4 pawn in frustration.
My opponent would probably be much more inclined to take my queen right away, thinking it was an honest mistake, no? Black already won a pawn, but, well, once he takes my queen he gets checkmated in 2 moves. I wait another 30 seconds, pretend my eyes light up and play Bxf2+, Ke2, Nf4# and claim I got incredibly lucky.

I'm guessing this is absolutely absurd behavior, but...I might as well ask if it's allowed and what the tournament rule is and how a tournament director would respond if my opponent said that I provoked him into making a blunder. Thanks

what is OTB?
also, i think it is ok, cus in a real tournament, i once had a queen sac and i pretended like it was a touch move blunder

OTB = Over The Board = Playing a real board tournament game instead of one online

@FunnyAnimatorJimTV ok thanks

Although not specifically prohibiting this action, it is against the rule of disturbing your opponent and against the general sportsmanship ethics. This action is even below of what I would expect of a human.

(Edited) I misread the question, sorry. It's not illegal, but it is somewhat underhanded...

If I recall correctly, the first documented usage of Legal's Mate was performed using this psychological trickery.

Per the most reliable source in existence, Wikipedia: "It is reported that Légal disguised his trap with a psychological trick: he first touched the knight on f3 and then retreated his hand as if realizing only now that the knight was pinned. Then, after his opponent reminded him of the touch-move rule, he played Nxe5, and the opponent grabbed the queen without thinking twice." Najdorf apparently used something similar at the 1952 Helinski Chess Olympiad: "[he] left a pawn en prise in time trouble, and then desperately clutched his head and reached out as if wanting to take the pawn back. ... Gligorić took the pawn, and soon thereafter lost the game. It transpired that Najdorf had staged the whole pantomime to blunt his opponent's watchfulness."

Personally, I find this behavior unethical--chess, in my opinion, is intended to be a battle of wits, not a battle of who the greatest actor is--but I also grudgingly accept that misdirecting one's opponent has historically been a significant aspect of chess (As a good example, IM Simon Webb has an entire section of his book "Chess for Tigers" that describes how a player, if attempting to swindle his opponent, should "try to look completely dejected and uninterested, in the hope that your opponent will get careless; but once you start getting your pieces into action and complicating the position, look as confident as possible in an effort to frighten him.")

Yes, it is.

Thanks jones, coffee and and @Nel_S, and that's interesting, I'm surprised psychology isn't talked about more in chess, and actually the example I gave from the opening I'm studying is almost exactly like Legal's Mate but it was just a coincidence!

@Vertonghen What is? Sorry for the confusion

Awesome post! Wow!

Yes, this would be completely legal as there is no way to prove intent, and even if you could, since when was "provoking a blunder" an infraction in chess? I thought that it was the point!

I had a situation where a young lady set up a sacrifice and tried to make it look like a blunder by asking for a takeback.

I was a little bit annoyed with her underhandedness, but secretly I was a little bit appreciative of her slyness.