Avoid DRS, give more power to third umpire

[1]

England won the first Ashes Test, which swung like a pendulum till the time English bowler James Anderson sent Australian wicketkeeper Brad Haddin packing in what can be called a controversial decision. But that's the best way a controversy-ridden Test could have ended.
The series opener can also turn out to be an eye-opener regarding the implementation of DRS (Decision Review System). The much talked about Trott's dismissal is a classic example of how ineffective it can be at times. According to a cricket board and some cricketers, technology should be used only when it is foolproof or cent per cent accurate. Honestly, only then the technology serves the purpose or else all decisions should be left to the on-field umpires.
A few on-field decisions may go wrong, but at least there will be some kind of uniformity and consistency. Sometimes, teams can be at the receiving end of blunders but all former and current players will agree that it evens out at the end of the day.
If at all we want to get rid of howlers, then the third umpire should intervene and change the on-field decision, specially with the help of walkie-talkie which will not even take that much time and this can be done without the help of referrals. If the sole purpose is to get rid of the howlers, it makes one wonder why the third umpire cannot come into the picture and overturn the wrong decision.
As per the current rule, third umpire can act only when the on-field umpires seek their help. This should be avoided, and instead the third umpire should be given the liberty to intervene as and when necessary when it feels a blunder has been committed by the on-field umpires.
Coming to the DRS, it has its limitations and is plagued with a few problems that is still not corrected despite it being used for five years now. Besides, there are some serious doubts on some of the leg-before decisions which are ruled in favour of the batsman or vice-versa using the referral system. An umpire must keep in mind the fact that bounce varies in different conditions and on different pitches when judging leg-before decisions. Using Hawk-Eye on a pitch of uneven bounce for LBW referrals may give inaccurate results and thereby, neutralising the DRS system.
Moreover, a howler cannot be termed otherwise irrespective of the fact that the umpire got it wrong or the team is not left with enough reviews to challenge it. Stuart Broad incident in the first Ashes Test is a good example and he should not have been allowed to stay at the wicket just because the other team has used both their reviews. That does change the fact that it was a poor decision and somebody should have intervened to overturn the error. It is hard to understand who it can be other than the third umpire.
DRS was initiated to get rid of human errors, but to be honest, it has only added more confusion and ambiguity and and so far it has not served the purpose.