Given that the venue was Murrayfield Stadium in Edinburgh, it was perhaps predictable that Tavish Scott would seize on a sporting metaphor yesterday when reacting to the announcement that he had won the contest to become leader of the Scottish Liberal Democrats by an emphatic margin.

Given that the venue was Murrayfield Stadium in Edinburgh, it was perhaps predictable that Tavish Scott would seize on a sporting metaphor yesterday when reacting to the announcement that he had won the contest to become leader of the Scottish Liberal Democrats by an emphatic margin. But it was the Olympics rather than rugby that he chose as a theme for his first political speech in his new job, insisting he was, like Chris Hoy, the triple-gold-medal winner, equally comfortable and confident to be part of a federal organisation.

But there is one big difference between the two men. Mr Hoy is a winner whose exploits have ensured that he enjoys a high profile throughout Britain. Mr Scott has become leader of a party still seeking a role after eight years in coalition government with Labour at Holyrood. While the public was gripped by the achievements of Britain's Olympians in China, the Scottish LibDems had a leadership contest that barely seemed to make an impression, other than with the party's 5000 members. Mr Scott's priorities are to register his party more prominently on the Scottish political radar, reconnect with the electorate and set out a clear and coherent sense of purpose for the shifting sands of the devolutionary landscape.

He cleared the first hurdle with ease by securing enough first-preference votes to avoid a run-off. Now he must negotiate the gruelling marathon of making the LibDems a force once more. First time round, it was as junior partner in the two Labour-led administrations to 2007. But wringing concessions did not reap dividends at the polls. It is still relatively early days, but the SNP has demonstrated that minority government can work. It is certainly not to be feared and must appear a feasible future option for Labour, when it has a leader in place and sets about seeking to assert itself as an opposition to be taken seriously.

So is there any future for the LibDems as a partner in government? It seems a questionable proposition. If not, will Mr Scott seek to exert influence by adopting the Scottish Tory strategy of cooperating with other parties, including the Scottish Government, when warranted? There is scope on the principle of local income tax, a policy on which the LibDems and SNP agree. But the outright opposition of the LibDems to a referendum on independence suggests there is limited room for doing deals, especially as Mr Scott played a pivotal role in developing his party's rigid position. Mr Scott's LibDems are an unknown quantity. But one thing is certain. Holyrood needs a gutsy, combative performer to take on Alex Salmond and hold his government to account. Mr Scott has the opportunity to show if he has the credentials.