9-1-3d NHFS Editorial Change ? ? ?

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

This is another editorial change which a discussion on this forum is directly responsible for generating.
I made the point several years ago that a player who kept both feet in the marked lane space, but bent down and placed a hand in the lane was technically not breaking any rule.
Some people stated that they would penalize the player anyway, but it was agreed that this situation was not clear. Disconcertion was a possibility as well, but "leaving the marked lane space" was up for interpretation.
The fact is that this extra restriction is now in place to clarify the desire of the NFHS committee.

Therefore, based on what you know of the committee's intent, does this editorial change to 9-1-3d still not allow a player to break the 9-1-3g "vertical plane"?
The NFHS "Officials' Quarterly" (Fall, 2009), p.18, states: "New language in Rule 9-1-3d states that a player leaves a marked lane space when he or she contacts any part of the court outside the marked lane space (3 feet by 3 feet)." That seems to change the "vertical plane" requirement of 9-1-3g.
Yet, on the other side of the matter it seems, Todd Apo writes on page 25, "Players are attempting to gain a rebounding advantage by violating the free-throw restrictions and entering the lane early. No player shall enter, leave or touch the court outside the marked lane space...". Without citing either rule, that seems to imply that the "vertical plane" requirement is still in force.
I guess what's throwing me for a loop is that I've received word from a representative of our state association that, "...you have a violation only if the player contacts any part of the court outside the line space.
Remove vertical plane from your list of things to watch."

I'm looking for a positive conclusion one way or the other on this and appreciate the insights thusfar shared.