Albion supporters are telling Lewes District Council: "Don't waste taxpayers' money by challenging the Falmer verdict."

The council has spent £207,000 in public money as the main opponent of the stadium application, which was approved by John Prescott last month.

It is currently awaiting legal advice on whether or not it has grounds to mount a judicial review against the Deputy Prime Minister's decision.

The cabinet will decide whether to proceed when it meets on November 24.

Tim Carder, chairman of Brighton and Hove Albion Supporters' Club, urged fans to bombard the council with polite messages telling them not to pursue a challenge.

He said: "The council has already spent around £207,000 of taxpayers' money fighting a development which a far greater number of their residents appear to support than disagree with.

"In terms of petitions, the figures within Lewes were five-to-one in favour.

"I would advise any resident of Lewes District who doesn't want to see any more public money spent on opposing this popular and beneficial development to make their views known to their councillors and to the council leader, Ann De Vecchi."

Coun De Vecchi said she and her colleagues were looking forward to an informed debate when they received advice from the council's legal team.

She said: "If we are advised that there are grounds for a challenge, we would, of course, have to take advice on the cost of doing so and the likelihood of us winning before we took a view on how to proceed.

"There is currently no definitive opinion one way or another."

Mr Carder added: "John Prescott has made his decision based on a 62-day public inquiry and the democratic process has run its course.

"Lewes should accept that, in the unlikely event that a judicial review was successful, the judge could only require Mr Prescott to re-examine the way he made his decision and the end result would probably be the same."

Falmer Parish Council is also awaiting advice from its lawyer as well as Lewes council's legal team.

A judicial review will be allowed if there is reasonable evidence that Mr Prescott's decision was unlawful. The deadline for challenging his decision is December 8.

Henry Oliver, head of planning for the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), said that, although the organisation disagreed with the verdict, it would not be mounting a legal challenge.

He added: "It was an outrageous decision that appears to contravene a number of planning and environmental policies."