Viduka's future

[Minhosa]

Didn't want him and voiced concerns last year about his god awful injury record and his inability to turn up for 3 matches in a row.

 

Some people may remember I was peddling the services of James Beattie ahead of Viduka for the shear fact he would command half of Viduka's salary and he had a major point to prove after flunking at Everton.

 

I stand by that view. Beattie would've been the better investment.

 

He may not have Viduka's class but what good is class when your a fat lazy get signing only to top up your pension?

[Teasy]

Who said that?, not me that's for sure.  Asnwer this anyone, who else in world Football would be prepared to pay a backup player £65,000 per week?  Its f***ing mental and has the stop!!

 

He certainly isn't a back up player.

 

He is easily good enough to start for most teams, and I bet every manager in the league would love to have unfit Viduka come off the bench for the final half hour.

 

Yes he's good enough to start but the fact is he won't, not more then 20 games a season anyway, which means he's not fit to be anything but a backup player.  I'm sure a lot of managers would love to have the option to bring Viduka off the the bench for the last 30 minutes of a game, but not one of them would be stupid enough to pay £65,000 per week for the privilege!

[Consortium of one]

I voted B but with a caveat.  Who's going to buy him injured?  Get him on the pitch and hope to hell he has something left.  If he does has something left, you'll see what kind of value he has.  Maybe he can still be good enough to keep, doubtful, but maybe.  Still, people are going to want to see if he's healthy before they spend a dime on him.  No choice really, other than to just release him and pay him anywyas.

[Doug]

D Hes finished man

[Colocho]

Don't we already have a younger replacement?

[hoppaz]

D hes is a finished man. Kluivert used to run more than he does. During last season I saw him run about 40 yards along the front line. I agree he is top class but he just looks overweight and might score you half a dozen goals. If we want to change the culture within Newcastle United we need to get the top earners who are always injured off our books. Duff, Viduka, Emre should all be peddled. I would want a culture whereby the lower earners who show up and are willing to train and play don't look at the likes of Emre, Duff and Viduka and think why do I bother when they are earning more than double in a lot of cases when they don't even play.

 

I would put Owen in that bracket but he does geniunely look up for playing when fit so I won't. There are players out there who will get you more than 10 goals who are young and hungry and on less wages than Viduka is on.

[tmonkey]

Keep him for one more season as backup, then release on a free.

 

At least if hes fit some of the time, it'll mean we wont be having Smith or Ameobi playing "some of the time".

 

We definitely have to sign a first team targetman to play up front, unless we're planning on playing Owen or Martins up there.

[Tooj]

Ideally we could bring a striker of similar style in, obviously of fairly decent quality and he could be used sparingly.

[tmonkey]

Ideally we could bring a striker of similar style in, obviously of fairly decent quality and he could be used sparingly.

 

Huntelaar would be perfect. Would no doubt tell us to 'eff off.

[Raconteur]

 

That doesn't make him value for money though!  He played 21 games last season and scored 7 goals, he's on £60-£70,000 per week, that's a f***ing waste of money!  Its the kind of wages the club should pay a top player who plays almost every game and contributes big things to the team, its not the kind of money we should be playing a lazy bit part player who's class for 45 minutes when he's fit enough to play!

 

Not really, they all earn 100k+ and they all play for the Big Four. Which is why the next bracket of players are on such ridiculous wages - look at Pompey and West Ham and what they had to pay to lure good (but not great) players. It's why Owen is on 100-120k pw and Viduka 60-80k pw (depending who you believe)

 

If Viduka is on 60k pw, then I'd say that's almost the market rate for what he is - a classy veteran striker with bags of experience, goals and sheer quality. Yes, he has a dubious injury record and a reputation for turning up when he feels like it. But if he could stay injury free and commit every week we wouldn't be having this discussion, because he'd be earning 120k pw and playing for someone else

 

[Dave]

Sounds like he wants C & D to be out of the question anyway:

 

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/sport/football/article-1029705/Viduka-driven-bringing-European-glory-nights-Newcastle-faithful.html?ITO=1490

Viduka driven on by bringing European glory nights back to the Newcastle faithful

 

By Sportsmail Reporter

Last updated at 3:25 PM on 26th June 2008

 

Mark Viduka is desperate to fulfil his European dreams at Newcastle as he battles his way back from injury.

 

The 32-year-old Australian ended the last campaign on the treatment table with a persistent Achilles  problem, which he hopes will not ultimately require surgery.

 

But before he succumbed, he had teamed up with Michael Owen and Obafemi Martins in a three-pronged strike-force that did much to drag the Magpies away from the fight for Barclays Premier League survival.

 

The trio claimed 11 goals between them in seven games as Newcastle finally halted their winless run under new boss Kevin Keegan to increase optimism for the new campaign.

 

Managing director Derek Llambias and executive director (football) Dennis Wise and his team are currently working to implement Keegan's summer recruitment plans in an effort to ensure the club return to the upper reaches of the league table and once again challenge for European qualification and silverware.

 

Viduka, who experienced European football during his time at Celtic, Leeds and Middlesbrough, would love to do so again in a black and white shirt as he enters

the latter stages of his career.

 

He said: 'I have had great European nights in my career, but I would love to go back there with Newcastle.

 

'To be involved in European games at St James' Park would be something special.

 

'I would love to play in front of the crowd here in Europe because the fans are so passionate. It would really be something for me.

 

'I would love it to happen and that will be the aim - to get back in there next season.'

 

Viduka's last European action came in the 2006 UEFA Cup final when Boro's thrilling adventure was brought to a shattering conclusion by Sevilla.

 

The Australia international played a major role in the Teesside club's progression to the final as they staged remarkable fightbacks to see off first FC Basle and then, in a dramatic semi-final, Steaua Bucharest.

 

Newcastle played in the same competition the following season under Glenn Roeder, but their involvement ended at the quarter-final stage when they surrendered a 4-2 first-leg lead over AZ Alkmaar to go out on the away goals rule.

 

The Toon Army will endure a second successive season without European football

this time around.

 

But Viduka knows just how much qualification means to them and is confident that will prove a real motivation when the season gets under way.

 

He said: 'This club is all set up for European football. Hopefully, the results will keep going our way like they did at the end of last season. If we play like we did in the last third of the season, the results will continue to come.'

[Guest Heneage]

Don't we already have a younger replacement?

I pray you don't mean Carroll.

[relámpago blanco]

Don't we already have a younger replacement?

I pray you don't mean Carroll.

Nah he mean's Shola.

[Cronky]

He'd be useful as an impact sub, but I'd really like us to bring in someone better to lead the line.

 

He has the reputation of being a bad trainer, and I don't think he's looked after himself over the years. He's now very slow and the better centre backs can block him out of the game altogether.

[Theregulars]

Who said that?, not me that's for sure.  Asnwer this anyone, who else in world Football would be prepared to pay a backup player £65,000 per week?  Its f***ing mental and has the stop.

 

Chelsea.

 

I just think this is over the top. It's so simple. Shola and Smith are crap, so sell. Carroll is young and doesn't seem all that so loan. Then by 1 or 2 more strikers. The problem with Viduka and why we all notice his injury record is because we depend on him, because those who play in his place are awful (see above). We clearly need to keep Viduka because when he's fit, he scores a few, and his contribution to our attacking play is immense. Physically slow but mentally so much quicker than loads of defenders in the league, clearly got a goo dthing going on with Martins and Owen. Fair enough, he's on fat wages, but there are so many players at our club who are on huge money and should go before him: Smith, Duff, Barton, I presume Cacapa gets a lot of money, Smith, Smith, Smith, Smith.

[Teasy]

Who said that?, not me that's for sure.  Asnwer this anyone, who else in world Football would be prepared to pay a backup player £65,000 per week?  Its f***ing mental and has the stop.

Chelsea

 

I just think this is over the top. It's so simple. Shola and Smith are crap, so sell. Carroll is young and doesn't seem all that so loan. Then by 1 or 2 more strikers. The problem with Viduka and why we all notice his injury record is because we depend on him, because those who play in his place are awful (see above). We clearly need to keep Viduka because when he's fit, he scores a few, and his contribution to our attacking play is immense. Physically slow but mentally so much quicker than loads of defenders in the league, clearly got a goo dthing going on with Martins and Owen. Fair enough, he's on fat wages, but there are so many players at our club who are on huge money and should go before him: Smith, Duff, Barton, I presume Cacapa gets a lot of money, Smith, Smith, Smith, Smith.

 

Everyone agrees we should get rid of Smith, Duff and most agree on Barton (including me).  But Viduka has to go as well IMO, of course unlike the aforementioned useless twats I would want a replacement for him guarenteed first.

 

The fact that Chelsea are the only other club you can think of that would pay a backup player that kind of money should tell you how f***ing insane it is that we're paying Viduka £65,000 per week.  IMO the only way we should keep him for another season is if we can't get a suitable replacement (or if we can't get rid of him of course).

[Guest Dev]

Everyone saying let Viduka go for free is delusional. Even if he only has another 1-2 seasons in him, it isn't like we have players of his class lining up to join the club. How many other strikers are going to join the club who will put away a goal every two or three games when fit?

 

honestly did anyone here watch the games last season? Out of the overwhelming flood of shit we were served up for 75% of the season, Viduka, Beye and Owen were the only consistently good players (when fit). And you want to ship one of them out on a free? Madness. Probably the same crowd who wanted to sell Owen on the cheap last year.

[James]

One thing we forget about Viduka is that his high wage is compensated by his low transfer fee.

 

It is all very well saying that so and so is payed more than so and so, but at the end of the day, it is the total amount invested in a player that really matters, ie transfer fee + wage - recoupment if sold.

 

Comparing a few people based on the wages that get bandied around:

 

Viduka: Free Transfer, 2-year contract at £75,000pw = 0 + (75000x104) = £7,800,000 (£3,900,000 per season)

Smith: £6m fee, 5-year contract at £60,000pw = £21,600,000 (£4,320,000 per season)

Duff: £5m fee, 5-year contract at £60,000pw = £20,600,000 (£4,120,000 per season)

Martins: £9m fee, 4-year contract at £50,000pw = £19,400,000 (£4,850,000 per season)

Owen: £16m fee, 4 year contract at £80,000, £6.6m compo received = £26,040,000 (£6,510,000 per season [or £8,680,000 if we assume that one season of contract was compensated] )

 

Considering all that, what the club are paying for Viduka isn't all bad.

[Alberto2005]

I think Viduka is an excellent player at times and could have been a good squad player for us this season, but now he's injured he really can't offer us much.

[SUPERTOON]

Has it actually been confirmed how long he is out it was rumoured he could be back for the start of the season or depending on how serious it was 6-8 months?

[Raconteur]

Who said that?, not me that's for sure.  Asnwer this anyone, who else in world Football would be prepared to pay a backup player £65,000 per week?  Its f***ing mental and has the stop.

Chelsea

 

I just think this is over the top. It's so simple. Shola and Smith are crap, so sell. Carroll is young and doesn't seem all that so loan. Then by 1 or 2 more strikers. The problem with Viduka and why we all notice his injury record is because we depend on him, because those who play in his place are awful (see above). We clearly need to keep Viduka because when he's fit, he scores a few, and his contribution to our attacking play is immense. Physically slow but mentally so much quicker than loads of defenders in the league, clearly got a goo dthing going on with Martins and Owen. Fair enough, he's on fat wages, but there are so many players at our club who are on huge money and should go before him: Smith, Duff, Barton, I presume Cacapa gets a lot of money, Smith, Smith, Smith, Smith.

 

Everyone agrees we should get rid of Smith, Duff and most agree on Barton (including me).  But Viduka has to go as well IMO, of course unlike the aforementioned useless twats I would want a replacement for him guarenteed first.

 

The fact that Chelsea are the only other club you can think of that would pay a backup player that kind of money should tell you how f***ing insane it is that we're paying Viduka £65,000 per week.  IMO the only way we should keep him for another season is if we can't get a suitable replacement (or if we can't get rid of him of course).

 

But there's a difference between a backup player and a squad player - and I'm sure many people would be happy to put Viduka in the latter, even if he is on big wages.

 

Look around the Prem - what sort of wages are being paid to strikers who don't start every week? What are Crouch, D Bent, Ashton et al earning? And what would you be happy with them getting if they signed for the Toon?

 

You seem to be suggesting 65k for an ageing backup striker is unreasonable, I suggest 65k for uniquely gifted squad player passing his prime is the going rate these days...

 

[Guest Dev]

Has it actually been confirmed how long he is out it was rumoured he could be back for the start of the season or depending on how serious it was 6-8 months?

 

One thing with the V-Bomber, which you learn after appreciating the big man for many years, is that it's best not to try to guess when he's going to be fit. Generally the only time he'll come good is when you've utterly lost hope he will ever grace a football pitch again.

 

I hope we give him time to get fully fit before putting him back out there as he is one of the most prone players in the world to picking up niggling injuries when he plays half fit, which then put him out for another couple of months.

[Guest Heneage]

We need a big squad, might as well keep him.

[Teasy]

How many other strikers are going to join the club who will put away a goal every two or three games when fit?  honestly did anyone here watch the games last season? Out of the overwhelming flood of s*** we were served up for 75% of the season, Viduka, Beye and Owen were the only consistently good players (when fit).

 

A goal every three games isn't really that great..  Even a striker who only scores 1 in every 4 games over 50 apearences is going to score more then one who scores 1 in every 3 but can only play 20 games.

 

Also consistently good when fit isn't consistent.  Wether he's inconstent through being s*** most games or through not being fit he still hasn't been consistent.

 

But there's a difference between a backup player and a squad player - and I'm sure many people would be happy to put Viduka in the latter, even if he is on big wages.

 

Look around the Prem - what sort of wages are being paid to strikers who don't start every week? What are Crouch, D Bent, Ashton et al earning? And what would you be happy with them getting if they signed for the Toon?

 

IMO the difference is one of reliability..  Which is why Viduka is a backup, because he can't be relied upon to be anything more.

 

I'd bet only Ashton will be earning anything near the amount Viduka is (mostly because West Ham have gone as nuts as we've been lately), and if we signed any of the three I wouldn't offer them more then £45,000 at the very most.

 

You seem to be suggesting 65k for an ageing backup striker is unreasonable, I suggest 65k for uniquely gifted squad player passing his prime is the going rate these days...

 

Its only the going rate at this crazy club, nowhere else, or it was anyway hopefully not anymore.  That's why we have a completely obsene wage bill, because we've been paying players twice what there worth for years.

[Teasy]

Basically my opinion on Viduka is this.  If Keegan believes he can play the majority of our games next season (30-40) then IMO he should be kept for one more season.  But if he thinks he'll only manage another 20 or even less (with his current injury) then we should do our best to affload him, after finding a replacement obviously.