Shooter landing on defender laying on floor

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

...

Are we to assume that once a player falls to the floor that rules using the term vertical should now be mentally changed to the term horizontal?

I'm saying a player is entitled to a spot on the floor WITHIN his vertical plane. A prone player is outside of his vertical plane. There is always a blanket statement that a player is entitled to his spot on the floor, with no qualifications. Well, we already know a prone player who contacts a defender is responsible for an illegal screen. We already know a stationary defender with his arms outstretched is responsible for illegal contact to his arms, no matter how stationary he is and how long he has been there. And we no longer have a case play that says a prone player is entitled to his spot on the floor. Defense is based on the principles of LGP and/or verticality.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

... we no longer have a case play that says a prone player is entitled to his spot on the floor.

Your posts are rational and intelligent and may, indeed, be correct.

Based on 4-23-1, no apparent relevant rule changes since the caseplay was removed, and no announcement as to why it was removed (with nothing different to replace it), I'm sticking to the caseplay "ghost", but acknowledge that I may be absolutely wrong in doing so.

Stupid NFHS.