No, it just points to a. Having a reasonable exit process (the default of two years makes no sense) and b. The public having the patience to understand 40+ years of cooperation can't be rolled back in a matter of months.
Also they did not have to lodge the article 50 letter when they did, they could have spent years preparing and figuring out what it is exactly they want to accomplish.
Finally the EU gave an extension twice now for them to figure out what they want, instead of doing that UK govt doubled down on stupid.
Seeing all that happen, I'm convinced we should abolish voting. Instead of voting for prime minister, etc. they should be chosen at random from the general population the same way we do jury duty. Monte Carlo government. It can't be any worse than the current government and since it's random selection you can't have the process corrupted.
For comedy reasons, Article 50 was actually written for the EU, by Lord Kerr of Kinlochard, a cross bench peer in the UK's House of Lords. This was after the UK insisted the EU adopt something draconian, to dissuade new members from screwing the EU around.