Mark Viduka. What could have been..

Not that I'd change the Sutton/Larsson partnership for anything, I definitely believe Mark Viduka would have been a tremendous partner for Henrik and would have given Sutton a run for his money at the very least.

Definitely more talented, however his work rate and desire were nothing on Sutton.

 

We have the memories of Hartson and Sutton. Was Viduka really that much better than those two ? Doubt it. People suggesting Viduka could have reached the heights of Henrik Larsson if he had the right attitude need to have a word with themselves.

 

Not really, not attached enough to Austraila to grt annoued about it.

At the time he joined us and his performances that were dragging the worst Celtic team I ever saw, at the age of 23, scoring 30 in 37 for John Barnes Celtic and his all round ability, if he had a head in his shoulders he would have been world class.

Defenders couldn't cope with his physicality but his first touch, close control, heading, finishing and ability to find a space is 2nd only to Henrik. He never screwed the nut, I believe that had he took Larsson as an example, worked as hard as him and played next to him for a good few years he would have been close.

He is the closest, ability wise, Imve saw to Henrik.

 

I'm surprised at that because he seemed to blow hot and cold in England. Maybe if he came to Celtic during the Martin O'Neill era things might have been different. We were in a bit of a state as a club before that. Can't really blame him for wanting a move to Leeds United who were one of the best clubs in England at the time.

 

And why is that?

The man clearly had the talent - you cannot deny that.

His attitude was nowhere near that of Larsson's or Sutton's.

 

I never said he didn't have the talent. It was evident even in the twilight of his career that he was a good striker. Even if his attitude was on par with Henrik Larsson he would still be an inferior player. Henrik Larsson was world class. Viduka could have busted his * off and still not have achieved what Henrik Larsson did.

 

The fact he blew hot and cold was all down to his attitude, he just couldn't be arsed at times. Which is why he took a long holiday before even joining us, delaying his debut by about 4/5 months and then just decided * this, I'm not playing against Caley Thistle.

If he got his head screwed straight he would have been up there, not as good I don't think but definitely up there. Just think being able to score 30 goals in 37 games for Barnes.

The biggest compliment you can give him is that season, with Larsson's broken leg, nobody was complaining about the striking department. It was every other area of the team.

 

Viduka wasn't a million miles away from world class. I remember him scoring all 4 goals in a 4-3 win over Liverpool and his performance was ridiculous.

I remember him being linked with a £30 million move to Roma because I'm sure we had a 20% sell on clause and thought we'd be hitting the jackpot.

 

Like I said, the only thing that held him back from being world class was himself.

 

Definitely. * attitude.

 

What do yous mean by * attitude? The guy clearly applied himself at Celtic. His goal scoring record was phenomenal. Did he think he was something special ? Big ego ?

 

Viduka should have been great, I would say he was a good bit better than Hartson and should have been better than Sutton but was probably on a par with him. Laziness and poor mentality let him down from being a £20million+ player as he had the ability to be as good as the likes of Dzeko, Berbatov, Soldado, Negredo etc

He probably should have been world class.

 

You said anyone thinking he couldn't have reached the same heights as Larsson - well, I reckon he could have.

As Devlin says,the main difference between himself and Larsson was that of attitude and desire - Larsson totally blows viduka out of the water.

Ability wise? only thing that separates them was speed and fitness.

 

What is more telling than throwing your shirt to the floor and refusing to play the second half of a game where your team is losing?

And yes, his attitude to training etc was poor. He definitely did have a "*" complex about him. O'Neill sniffed it out as soon as he came to the club and booted him out to * - thank * the £5m made from him went straight back in to buying Sutton.

 

He applied himself at us? He never turned up to the job for the first 5 months for * sake. And then there's the game against Caley, decided nah this isn't for me and refused to come back onto the pitch after half time. Told the manager to * off, I'm no playing.

He was always huffy, always just decided that this wasn't for him. He done it by going awol with us. In the Premiership he just downed tools.

 

He was good because of pure ability though, he would never lose that. His touch was immaculite and he had great control of the ball, strength, skill and dribbling ability.

I think he just knew he was quality and never wanted to better himself through either just laziness or he just never wanted to. Was probably happy enough to plod along at decent teams not wanting to put in the work to get to a better team.

 

Talented as *, * attitude. Would have been up there if his head wasn't up his *. Saw Berkovic there as well, he was a good player with an even worse attitude in the end.

 

That team was like that. Attitude... Viduka, Berkovic, Burley...

 

Larsson is one of the best strikers I have seen. That may sound biased but even when he went to Barcelona he was brilliant. He played an integral part in Barcelona winning the CL. Could Viduka really have reached those heights ? Maybe he could have like you said.

If you were to stop a Celtic fan on the street and ask them if Viduka could have been as good as Larsson you would get a funny look. They might turn around and say aye. However the vast majority would say no.