I think the real question OP may want answered is how a warrior who survived his wounds and was no longer strong enough to serve as a warrior would be treated, hence the handicapped and crippled comment. Would those men be disrespected as men who failed to die as warriors? Would they be respected as hardy and proven hard to kill? Would they still be expected to die in battle to gain entrance to Valhalla and glory (a la an aged Beowulf, not fit to fight a dragon, fighting him anyway in order to die a warrior's death)?

Edit: Added a word, because sentences need verbs. Also other words and a comma, because I post too often on /r/grammar to not cringe at my own posts sometimes.

The underlying assumption behind this question is that Vikings were soldiers, that is was their job to be fighters. The curious thing about Vikings, and what set their society apart from say, the Roman army or the early modern period, is that their warriors were not just doing it as a job. Vikings either were Viking, or they just did some raiding 'on the side', besides them being persons doing a certain job.

So vikings who were in the employment of a leader, and got paid a salary (and room and board, basically) were not paid to do a job, they were paid to be. A viking who could not be relied on in battle anymore was still a member of a Viking group, and would still carry with him this social status of being of the arms-bearing class, of being of the group of 'friends of the king'. Of course, you can imagine that a Viking leader would not be particularly happy with having a useless person on the group, so the implicit 'contract' between the leader and his retinue still needed to be fulfilled. Hence why we see skeletons with old horrific injuries, who died in battle years later. Hence also the focus, in Viking poetry, on continued participation in battle even when this is impractical.

Now, mind that injury and disability didn't fundamentally change the relation between a leader and his followers. Already initially, it was expected that the leader supports the retinue with food and payment, so there is no reason why a disabled viking would need to feel ashamed for being supported by others.

You should also be aware that being part of a retinue (or being a thegn, or a hirdsman, the names vary a bit) was primarily a social status, and an indication of your relation to a leader. These characters could also be used as local administrators, you didn't just keep them physically around doing nothing. Their position, depending a bit on the character of the leader (because this is not institutionalised) was slightly analogous to a Frankish count (not the later feudal 'knight' type, mind).

Now, for those other Vikings who were not professional members of a retinue, the situation might have been a bit different. Many of them might have joined a viking group either voluntarily or as part of a conscription (this part is still under intense debate), but either way, their status also did not depend on their ability to fight. These people however would have been part of a family- or village-based community, and continue to be supported by these. There is no reason to assume they would have been treated any different from a modern person who is disabled and being cared for by his friends and family.

So with this social context in mind, we can have a look at the saga literature. In these, there are a number of characters who have disabilities, but it is better to see these not as incidental accidents suffered by the characters, but in context of other physical characteristics: ugliness, or physical aberration, such as left-handedness. The saga authors, like many societies, had certain ideals about the body. A person who does not fulfill such ideals thus had something special about them. Many poets in the sagas, for example, were also crippled, or blind, or disabled in some way, just as Odin himself was (and just as Aesop was known for his ugliness, or Homer for his blindness). It is from this association with aberration that disabled people might be feared or disdained, but that also would make them exceptionally suitable for certain other roles: as poets, seers, or guards, for example.

The idea that they would be shamed for failing to get to Valhalla is ludicrous. That would be a bit like deriving modern attitudes to disability from gangster rap.

The literary construct/ religious desire to die in battle was a well worn and probably commonly held conceit but whether real warriors suffered from -not- dying is not attested in the literature. As a side point, not all warriors who die in battle will be chosen to go to Valhalla, it is not a guarantee of a warrior afterlife. There are records in literature of strategies where targeted crippling blows would specifically be administered (in one case a warriors legs were chopped off and he kept on fighting on the stumps) but there is no record as to the fates of those men after the battle. Harold (a younger kin to Olaf Haraladson) tied his sword to his hand because he was too weak to fight, showing that there was a literary construct (and perhaps a social construct) which gave great honour to those too weak to fight who did so regardless. There is a skeleton in York (from the time of the Scandinavian rule) of a man who had several serious broken bone/ skull injuries which showed evidence of healing over time. He died youngish with a final severe head injury so his case does not quite fit as he healed and continued to fight, not crippled permanently (though he would have suffered severe pain and some loss of movement). This evidence suggests that it was common to live with serious injuries. There is a fantastic section of Njáls saga where an old warrior bemoans the weakness of his old body, that his decrepitude means can no longer defend his kin and his sons are dead and cannot take up his burden. This is more a reflection on age and self-identity but might suggest that he feels socially worthless because his body cannot function as a warrior anymore. There were roles for men who in real society (not just literature) who never fought, who were traders and poets etc, so there were spaces for men to take on other roles, though I cannot think of an example of a warrior who had to change career path because of injury.