I realize I'm not the first to say this, but timekeeping in soccer is absolutely ridiculous.  It's mind-boggling to watch a sport where literally no one knows when the game will end, not even the refs.  The argument is that if the refs stopped the clock during the game, teams could take advantage of the stoppage to get into a better position, or they could fake an injury to stop the clock, etc.  I get that, but surely there's a reasonable middle ground between no clock stoppages and some clock stoppages?  I watched a game where a guy BROKE HIS LEG, and the clock kept running.  That seems like a reasonable time to stop the clock.  Maybe there could be a handful of things that are stop-worthy, such as broken limbs, blood, decapitations (hasn't happened that I've seen), fan running on the field, etc. 

Aside from clock stoppages, could we at least get an idea of how much extra time there will be after regulation?  Surely that wouldn't too controversial.  Just a nice big clock on the sideline to let both the players and the fans know whether it'll be 30 seconds of extra time or 10 minutes. 

I played soccer (poorly) in high school, and we had timed halves.  I don't know how they managed the clock during the game, but it was never unclear when the game would end.  The fact that world-class major league soccer is run this nonchalantly is eye-opening to say the least. #sports

I've had a handful of experiences lately that have made me question the intelligence of the average person.  Doctor's offices, insurance companies, helpdesk people.  It's been a bit of a whirlwind. 

But actually intelligence is the wrong word.  Intelligence is essentially just "knowing things," and knowledge doesn't really come in to play as often as it might seem.  People can learn things.  Everyone is lacking intelligence about certain things, and that's fine. 

So then that made me think maybe it's capability, as in certain people are incapable of completing certain tasks.  But that's not really it either.  Human beings are surprisingly capable of many things, and they often become more capable as they become more intelligent. 

What I settled on was competence, which is basically having the intelligence and capability to accomplish something, and then actually successfully doing it.  Completing the task.  Finishing the job.  Whether for money or for free, a competent person will get a thing done. 

I don't know if it's a lack of motivation, or bad pay and long hours, or just a general disinterest in the positive outcome of a situation, but here's what I'm dealing with: 

• A medical receptionist who I called (multiple times) who was unable to successfully fax (yes, fax) a piece of paper to another doctor, only for me to suggest emailing it, which worked instantly.
• An insurance adjuster who couldn't understand the bill they sent me, and couldn't get the math to make sense on her end.
• An IT helpdesk person who couldn't identify a single human being involved in the servicing of a support ticket for software deployed and managed by his IT group.

I'm not the smartest person I know, or the most capable or competent, but I've either been unfairly conditioned by my coworkers and my friends and my family and basically every person I've ever known and interacted with to expect at least an ounce of competence, or people are getting dumber.