After watching several incorrect decisions being overturned in the South Africa-England series, iafrica.com's Tim Human is all for the review system, but can't help but feel that it could make umpires worse.

Daryl Harper has never been the best umpire in the world, but even his biggest critics would have been surprised at how awful he was in the pulsating draw at Newlands.

How he could have given Ashwell Prince out when there was daylight between bat and ball, and an LBW given despite Kevin Pietersen's beefy inside edge is anybody's guess.

But the question is: has Harper totally lost the plot or is he starting a trend of umpires indirectly double-checking with the man upstairs? (The third umpire, not God, if there is any confusion.)

The review system was put in place to help the on-field umpires and make sure that the correct decision is made. There is no doubt that it is succeeding in overturning some dodgy calls, but it may just have added more for the men in the middle to think about ? and they are clearly struggling.

The right decision can be guaranteed - sometimes by making the wrong call.

No longer will decisions be made purely on whether the umpire thinks that a player is out or not, but which verdict will ultimately result in the correct call being made.

I'll use the Pietersen case as an example.

If an LBW decision looks out, but there is doubt about a possible edge, surely it is better to give the batsmen out, ensuring that if he did hit it there will be a review?

There is no guarantee that the fielding team will review a 'Not Out' decision as they will have no better idea than the umpire if there was an edge or not, so it makes sense to stick him out and see if he did indeed get some bat to it.

The same goes for a caught behind decision. A batsmen will know if he knicked it better than anyone else, so why not simply ask him? All it takes is a raised finger. If he walks, you know he edged it, if he immediately makes the 'T' sign, you can be pretty sure he didn't.

Umpires, like everyone else in cricket, ultimately want the correct decision to be made, and now they have the power to ensure the right decision is made - sometimes by making the wrong call.

'Conclusiveness' the buzzword

Given the limited referrals allocated to each team, another factor which may enter an umpire's mind is the balance of reviews still in the bag.

If in doubt, why not give the benefit of the doubt to the team with no reviews left, rather than make a decision that cannot be overturned?

Of course, this shouldn't enter a professional, experienced umpire's mind, but one can hardly blame them for allowing technology to make a decision over which they could not be sure.

Another unfortunate outcome of the system is that the umpires may suffer a loss of confidence in their own abilities. It is one thing to learn of your errors after the day's play, but when a glaring error is exposed as it transpires it is understandably difficult to make another big call with any conviction.

Third umpire to second-guess himself

Even the third umpire, who sits in an air-conditioned box with the benefit of multi-angled television replays, is not immune to being influenced by factors outside of their direct judgement.

If, for example, a thin edge is referred instantaneously by a batsmen, does the player?s response enter into the third umpire's mind when he makes his call?

In the absence of HotSpot technology, edges are difficult to pick up and despite 'conclusiveness' being the popular buzzword surrounding the system, it is difficult to ignore the reaction of a player who is seemingly certain that he did not hit it.

If this, and I tend to think it does, plays a part in the decision-making process, it could even provide an opportunity for the more cunning players out there to teach themselves the art of the 'convincing referral'.

Maybe that is reading a bit too much into it, but the fact is the system is far from foolproof. Of course the system will be refined with time, but as it stands there is a lot of confusion amongst players, commentators and fans.

Add the umpires to the mix and it could be a bumpy ride until technology and human judgement find a comfort zone in the high pressure environment of Test match cricket. Or maybe Harper just is that bad.