They are also looking into the build-up to chief executive Mark Palios’ resignation after PR chief Colin Gibson tried to keep his boss’ name out of the scandal by revealing details of Eriksson’s affair with the same woman.

That chapter seems to have improved Eriksson’s own position, although his fate will not be decided until Thursday’s board meeting, when the FA’s 12 main powerbrokers sit in judgment of the whole unseemly saga.

While the meeting could also bring the actions of FA chairman Geoff Thompson and executive director David Davies under closer scrutiny, Eriksson still remains the main source of public attention.

He was interviewed this afternoon by the independent lawyer hired by the FA to carry out the investigation into the events of the past couple of weeks.

Their talks took place in secret, well away from the massed ranks of cameras and reporters arrayed outside the FA’s Soho Square headquarters.

Eriksson, who was also consulting his own lawyers, is thought to have maintained his innocence of any charges of deliberately misleading the FA over his relationship with Alam.

When questioned by Davies, one of his closest allies at the FA, on July 19 about allegations of an affair, the Swede is said to have responded simply that “this is nonsense”.

Davies seemingly took that to be an outright denial, matching Alam’s own insistence that nothing had taken place between them and sparking the original FA statement.

Eriksson has nevertheless insisted that he never issued a “categorical” denial, effectively arguing he had simply been expressing his distaste at intrusions into his private life.

His advisers expected him to set out that case at today’s meeting, leaving the FA to decide whether to sack him or back him after receiving the legal team’s report on Thursday.

With the European Human Rights Act prohibiting his bosses from asking about his private life and the FA open to an unfair dismissal claim after the circumstances of Palios’ departure, sacking him could be an expensive business.

With four years left on his £4million-a-year contract, the Swede could therefore still survive this saga, even if there remains some disquiet at his lack of achievements for such a princely sum.

The FA were nevertheless remaining tight-lipped today, a policy that would ironically have served them better at the outset.

Eriksson, meanwhile, was only commenting in public on the surprise international retirement of Paul Scholes.

Otherwise, he was being cautioned by his advisers to lie low for the next 48 hours despite having planned a trip to Manchester United’s friendly against PSV Eindhoven tonight.

Davies, meanwhile, remained in temporary charge behind the scenes as caretaker FA chief executive, despite speculation that Sir Trevor Brooking was being lined up for the role on a short-term basis.

Brooking is seen by some as the ideal figurehead to present the respectable, clean-cut face of the organisation over the next few weeks and, above all, as a safe pair of hands.

The former England international was hired by Palios as the FA’s director of football development in January.

He told the Evening Standard: “In a short time he [Palios] made a big and worthwhile contribution and, in my opinion, it won’t be easy finding the right person to succeed him.

“He did some very good work for the FA at a difficult time. His particular area of expertise is finance and in that sense he has made an excellent contribution to the FA and will be a tough act to follow.

“I was saddened and shocked when I heard he’d resigned. I consider him a decent man who brought me into this job and became a good friend.”

Brooking could yet find himself appointed in a caretaker capacity, either as chief executive or possibly even as England coach, before the end of the week.

After all, Palios is not expected to be the last employee to leave the FA as a result of this tawdry affair.

The real question nevertheless remains as to whether Eriksson has to follow him out.