GIVEN the current state of the England team, the Football Association’s tunnel vision in building a new national stadium at Wembley is finally being exposed.

The stadium, which cost a staggering £757million to build, currently hangs round the neck of the national game’s governing body like a millstone.

With such astronomical costs involved, the FA have no choice but to continue to host games at Wembley in order to pay off their debts.

Club England chief Adrian Bevington has admitted it could be nine more years before the organisation is “debt free”.

Had the FA spent less on revamping Wembley, and ploughed money into other areas of the game that need it, they may have avoided the hamstrung position they now find themselves in.

Following back-to-back World Cup disasters, wouldn’t it have been great to have taken England back on the road, as they did with much success when the old Wembley was knocked down?

With fans disillusioned, taking games to the supporters around the country for a few years might have helped restore the public’s long-term faith in Roy Hodgson’s (pictured) side.

But, because of the cost of Wembley, that option is not there.

The stadium was barely half full for the friendly victory against Norway and forthcoming Euro 2016 qualifying matches against the powerhouses of San Marino, Lithuania, Estonia and Slovenia hardly whet the appetite for the casual supporter.

Particularly when UEFA’s enlarging of the tournament in France to 24 teams means the top two sides in each group, plus one best third-placed side, will progress.

Planned friendlies against Germany, Spain, France, Holland and Italy over the next few years might pull in the crowds but these are nothing more than cash cows.

Rather than try to entice fans with high-profile opposition to get bums on seats, England could be out on tour and engaging with their supporters.

A packed Villa Park, St James’ Park, Etihad Stadium or St Mary’s would be infinitely better than 40,000 rattling around inside Wembley.