Were the Commonwealth Games a success for Scotland?

How should a country measure success at a Commonwealth Games?

Is it simply about the number of medals? And does the colour of those medals matter?

Author | Palvinder Singh

Is success better judged by athletes reaching their own Everest, doing themselves justice, making people proud and creating memories that last?

If it is about numbers, Team Scotland can look back on an encouraging Games at their second home Commonwealth Games in 12 years. The statistics show Glasgow 2026 was Scotland's third-best Games ever for medals won.

They finished with 39 medals, including 13 golds, a total bettered only by the 19 they claimed at Glasgow 2014. With nine silvers and 17 bronzes added to the tally, Scotland finished fifth in the medal table.

That is one place higher than Birmingham four years ago, while their 13 golds matched the total from those Games.

Was the final medal haul a good one?

Granted, the overall medal haul and number of golds falls some way short of the last time the Games were held in Glasgow, but there are several factors worth considering before reaching such a blunt conclusion.

Being on home soil was clearly significant, but Glasgow 2014 also featured the largest Scottish team ever sent to a Commonwealth Games, with 313 athletes.

Remove more than 130 competitors from that figure this time and the comparison becomes rather less straightforward.

There is also the size of the medal pool to consider. Twelve years ago, 261 gold medals were available. That rose to 283 in Birmingham. This time, however, there were just 215 on offer because of the streamlined sports programme.

That reduction has also meant fewer athletes competing. Team Scotland had 177 competitors this time, compared with 261 for England. That works out at one medal for every 4.54 Scottish athletes.

Four years ago, the equivalent figure was 5.30, suggesting there has been genuine progress.