Since the new rule for NCAA Men only allow 4 Def/3 Off in the lane during freethrows...If they have more than the rule allows is this considered a lane violation???

It would first be considered a screw-up by the officials for letting it happen. But, yes, in that situation I believe it would be a violation of the free-throw provisions, and handled accordingly.

No. The officials just screwed up. They're supposed to catch it before the throw and make someone leave.

(and, by "3 Off", I assume you're including the shooter -- I think the rule really says "4 and 2" and doesn't count the shooter.)

Agreed that it's a screw-up, Bob, but similar situations would also be a violation--such as not having a defensive player on the bottom lane space. The refs had better catch it, but if they don't it is still a violation (and egg on the refs' respective faces).

Are you sure? The requirement is listed in 8-1-4 (and 8-1-5 for women), but there's no penalty.

Penalties are listed in 9-1, but number of players is not listed as a violation (your example, not filling lowest spaces, is listed specifically as a violation).

I'm willing to be convinced, but I don't see it yet.

Hmmm . . . I confess that I only have last year's NCAA book in my office, so I am partly assuming that the new book still lists the revised/changed lane requirements after the statement, "A player shall not violate the following free-throw provisions." Keeping that assumption, I then assume that not lining up according to those guidelines is considered a violation along with the other provisions. There are a couple statements (again, in last year's book) that seem to apply, even with the new rule: one that says players not in a marked lane space (which hopefully now reads "designated" or something like that) must be behind the free-throw line extended and 3-point arc, and the other that specifies which spaces must be and can't be filled by whom. Having more than the allowed number of players on the lane would seem to violate both provisions, even though the refs should catch and rectify the situation before giving the shooter the ball. Hence, a violation. That's my thinking, anyway, but I'll have to double-check the wording in the new manual (which takes a little getting used to, given the different format it uses this year).