I am concerning that the quoted text is quite divergent from the original, that some errors might be mixed in. Below is the transcription of a rubbing of Ming dynasty calligraphy, and the character at the position is 靶.

https://kotenseki.nijl.ac.jp/biblio/200021269
《聖主得賢臣頌》：「庸人之御駑馬亦傷吻弊策而不進於行……及至駕齧𦡀𩥵乗旦王良執靶韓哀附輿縦騁馳騖忽如影靡過都越國蹶如歴塊追奔電逐遺風周流八極萬里一息何其𨖚哉人馬相得也」

▲ 白孔六帖（文淵閣抄本）卷32 folio 21b


▲ 唐宋白孔六帖（明抄本）卷32 folio 18a

▲ 唐宋白孔六帖（南宋刊本）卷32 folio 17b

聖主得賢臣頌 is authored by 王襃（90 - 51 B.C.E）. For such ancient text, the original evidence is probably long lost. Because of that I am not convinced that Ming Dynasty calligraphy would contribute a lot to the text authenticity.

We can go through some Song Dynasty evidences sourced from other books:


▲ 白氏六帖事類集（北宋刊本）卷9 folio 16b gives 靶


▲ 文選〔李善註〕（宋淳熙八年尤袤刊本）卷47 folio 2b gives 靶


▲ 漢書（南宋福州刊元遞修本）列傳34下 (27) folio 10b gives 靶

唐宋白孔六帖, first published in the end of Southern Song dynasty, is a compilation of 白氏六帖 and 孔氏六帖. From these evidences we can assume that the shift from 靶 to ⿰革舟 happens during the editing process of 唐宋白孔六帖. I agree that ⿰革舟 may be a misprint of 靶, or the editor of 唐宋白孔六帖 changed the glyph sourced from a book unavailable today. Given that ⿰革舟 persists across quite a few 唐宋白孔六帖 versions, I suggest encoding it as-is.