It's as unsettling as watching Oprah Winfrey and David Letterman holding hands like lovebirds in the latter's The Late Show in New York the other night.
That is, waiting for decisions from the third umpire during the Ashes cricket series in England.
In the same vein that I prefer the Letterman of old, having fun at the expense of Winfrey who had a penchant for mustering audiences to her studios with offers of lavish gifts, I'm beginning to feel the old-fashioned method of dismissing batsmen was more interesting.
The burning question is are the players - and spectators - more confused and disillusioned with the sport since umpires started employing the decision review system (DRS) in internationals?
No translation was required on what Kevin Pietersen mumbled as he stammered off during the second innings of the rain-hampered third test at Old Trafford, in Manchester, early this week.
Okay, it's too easy to blame the white coats when it's painfully obvious England aren't exactly striking fear in the hearts of their opposition and the Australians have been looking like a second-tier outfit until the third encounter.
Primarily one can argue the standard of batting in the series wasn't too flash and while the third test produced some lusty hitting it looked more like Twenty20 cricket because of the threat of rain prompting Australian captain Michael Clarke to make a hasty declaration while English counterpart Alistair Cook resorted to delaying tactics.
Both reactions were perfectly justified in that Clark's predicament is of the team's own making through poor form and Cook should not be under pressure to make life easier for the tourists who would have done the same.
Nevertheless, where the umpires become culpable is when batsmen, who are desperately trying to save their Ashes career, are losing their chances because of a DRS system that isn't everything it has been made out to be.
The fragility of the batting aside, credit should go to some clever bowling from Australians Ryan Harris and Peter Siddle as well as Jimmy Anderson and Graeme Swann for the hosts.
Unarguably the flaming DRS eclipsed the last match. And what's with using up referrals?
Introduced four years ago, the DRS incorporates footage based on infra-red hot spots, sound and virtual projected trajectory and bounce of the ball to decide the fate of batsmen.
Another piece of tech isn't up for grabs with two Ashes tests to go - the Snickometer, whose electrical impulse-like evidence detects any contact a willow makes with other objects.
Goodness knows why that has been left out when it's painfully obvious more than one device is more conclusive.
Ironically the ICC championed the DRS system to ensure human errors from umpires would eventually be minimised, if not eliminated, to offer a modicum of consistency during the height of play.
If anything, it seems to make the umpires appear more like villains, almost to the extent that the third umpire comes across as someone who is trying to save the blushes of the old boys' network at the crease.
Using up the three referrals allotted to a team means it's open slather so does that imply poor player judgement offers a licence to cheat?
India have always opposed the advent of technology and this somewhat reaffirms their scepticism.
Human error, it seems, feels more palatable to depicting officials as an inept brigade itching to push that "nuclear button", oblivious to the ramifications of players' emotions and careers.