Is it a boundary 4 or 6?

[oldie]

I umpired at a game where the boundary was marked by a painted white line. A ball was hit close to the boundary the fielder said he thought it hit the line, I wasn't sure if I should award it a 4 or 6. So I erred towards caution and awarded a 4, No-one complained and we got on with it, thank goodness.

What is the correct ruling?

[gooders]

Find out where your next refresher course is and make the effort to attend.

[oldie]

Thanks for the advice gooders, but I do realise that the law states that a ball hitting the line on the full is a 6. What I was enquiring is that when a fielder says "I think it hit the line" what would people do? I raised this with my peers, and they said that I did the correct thing. It would only be a 6 if the fielder was absolutely sure it hit the line on the full.

[Reggie Duff]

I think I would have awarded 6 runs because if a fielder is admitting that he "thinks" it hit the line, the batting side would have reason to be aggrieved if the result of the match was very close. In most decisions by convention any benefit of the doubt ends up with the batsman, and in this case, especially with the comment from the fielder I would certainly go that way

[SUHAS SAPRE]

Well gooders,

whenever Umpire cannot make out such things from such a long distance of about 70 yards, he has to wholly depend on the integrity of a fieldsman. And if you have still any doubts in the absence of TV replay and 3rd umpire, can decide after consulting your colleague. Decide accordingly. If a fieldsman on the boundary says the ball hits the rope directly, give boundary-6 and proceed with the game.

SUHAS SAPRE (BARODA 12/08/2011)

[mrsinghIndia]

In the stated circumstances, I, for one, would have called a six. Not because of the 'benefit to the batsman' line of thinking, but because I have asked the fielder and he says, 'I thought it touched the line'.
If I wanted to do my own thing, I would consult my colleague and continue as we both decide fit. If both not decided, - We know it is a four, not sure it is a six - therefore four, would be my thought process.
As an aside, in my view, this matter of 'Benefit of doubt goes to the batsman' is a bit over-stretched and overused.
I would like to say, as far as out/notout decisions go, 'the batsman is out only when the umpire is convinced it is a 100% out'. Is it saying the same thing? Maybe, maybe not.
Doesn't apply to everything.

[missingleg]

I, too, am uneasy about the batsmen getting the benefit of any doubt in all cases. I would have given a six as the fielder would have no benefit in benefiting the batting team.

Interestingly, The Laws don't say much about the benefit of the doubt going to the batsmen, except in the issue of catches carrying. For lbws, for example, it simply states 'in the opinion of the umpire', i.e. on the balance of probability. Batsmen can get away with too much in my opinion, there's always a varying degree of doubt with an lbw as the event of the ball hitting the wicket never took place.

[sillypoint]

As soon as "the fielder said he thought it hit the line" I would have awarded 6 runs and made it clear to all the players that I was doing so on the basis of the fielder's call. I have always made it a principle to accept the judgement of the fielder in the absence of any other evidence that I or my colleague can see for ourselves. If you ask the fielder and then go against what he says, why ask?

[jaybee]

sillypoint
Absolutely!