Sg206 - Acsc 230e And 230f 2½d Red KGV1 Definitive

Here is a picture of the ACSC entries and images for these two varieties.

Can I assume that these two entries and their respective images have been reversed? As you can see at the bottom left, my catalogue is a bit old: 2015. Can anyone let me know if this has changed in a later edition? If it has not been changed, I will approach BW.

I ask as I am now disposing of my stamps on Hipstamps. I have already posted one SG206 as 230f based on the text reference but at odd with the image. Here is an image:

I am currently writing up another SG206 which according to ACSC's text description would be 230e and have just noticed the problem with ACSC here. Here's an image of the variety area:

Looking at the descriptions and images, I think you have a point that they have been mixed up.

As for the stamp images you posted: I see neither variety in the final picture but the prolonged line in the full picture.

Yes, Looks like you are correct. Please put it down to a senior moment.