Context. Brock said he was told at a meeting 6 weeks out from season's end that they were looking at keeping him to mentor young players. This was with Mick, McKay, Buttifant and Rogers present. He said he walked away thinking he was wanted but aware it's not over until that contract is signed. That was his sole basis for this 'word' that Mick had given. Brock said this in mid September so it was obviously 6 weeks out from our season ending, so mid July.
By the start of October our trading strategy had to be adjusted and we got an extra player of McLean's style in the Jaksch trade. McKay told McLean his position was not safe and he was eventually delisted a full 3 months after that chat with the 4 Carlton officials.
Waite went to Mick's house a week before he officially signed for North.
Now you tell me that Mick knew Brock was out when he told him he was required 3 months prior or tell me that Waite did not know he was going to North a week before he signed. Then you can keep repeating the 'same thing' mantra.
If you're going to preach the value of someones "word", you have to stay true to yours otherwise you're a blatant hypocrite, which was the whole point of contention with the other poster.
The whole basis of a contract is to lock both parties into working terms, it still didn't stop MM and others knocking Waite (and his partner) for the fact that as a free-agent he opted to seek pastures new.
McLean displayed displeasure at not continuing on at Carlton and didn't even try to spin shit to make himself look better (he mentioned bickering with McKay) so unless people want to be spoon-fed propaganda about how perfect our club is, it's all pretty understandable given what we know of Brock as a straight shooter.
As others have said though, lingering on past players is of no use & bickering about things outside of our control does none of us any good.