. So a 3 is the maximum he can score off a ball without hitting a boundary
Why not 5 or 7? Why not consider a fielder constantly slipping on the ground so as to make 5 or 7 or even 9 runs possible while running between the wicket? Also consider all fielders do the same for last ball of each of the 50 overs?
If we have already settled that it's possible for a single player to hit 5 sixes and then get a 3 for each over, why not add this bit as well?
At some point you need to set a boundary, otherwise the question is meaningless. People have hit 6s and people have run 3s without overthrows. No one has run a 5 without a misfield or an overthrow in Test cricket. Also this sort of question requires a certain mindset - so someone who tries to point out that the question is flawed, when the question was not meant to be flawless, is revealing his character - which may be what the person asking the question was after. Can this candidate solve a problem or is he going to be a smart ass by responding with unprovoked and unneeded criticism?