It has nothing to do with 'feelings'. 'Feeling' and 'optics' are for Libtards.
No, it's that the racing rules should be applied consistently, which is something that has never happened and will continue to never happen.
What Luis Saez did happens every. single. day., it's called 'herding', and given that the stewards ommitted this in their pre-race address to the jockeys -- when they could have easily said, "hey guys, we know many of you are from out of town, Churchill has decided to call herding this year", without that admonition, then the Kentucky Derby is the absolute wrong spot to start calling herding a foul, when herding has occurred in nearly every. single. prior. Derby.
But herding hasn't even been called during the prior five days of racing so far at Churchill.
For Christ's sake, the opening race on opening day, in a tiny 6-horse field, the favorite came left off the rail in the drive to herd the second-choice and to expressly take away his lane. No inquiry, no objection, nothing.
Which directly puts the lie to Mott's classless comment that the stewards would take this horse down on a weekday. The hell they would.
Dozens of identical no-calls happen across the nation every single week. Right or wrong doesn't enter into it. The racing rules are ignored, unless it benefits rich ownership LLCs or HoF trainers, not the humble West's and their homebreds trained by Servis.
For Christ’s sake, the opening race on opening day, in a tiny 6-horse field, the favorite came left off the rail in the drive to herd the second-choice and to expressly take away his lane. No inquiry, no objection, nothing.
...
But two riders made objections in the Derby:
Borden read a statement explaining the decision. She declined to take any questions. (The Kentucky Horse Racing Commission is a state government agency charged with regulating the conduct of horse racing and parimutuel wagering on horse racing and related activities.)
She explained that the riders of No. 18, Long Range Toddy, and No. 20, Country House, had lodged complaints against Maximum Security, saying there had been interference as they left the quarter-pole and headed for home.
“We had a lengthy review of the race,” Borden said. “We interviewed affected riders.” She said the stewards had unanimously agreed that Maximum Security drifted out and affected the progress of No. 1, War of Will, in turn interfering with Long Range Toddy and No. 21, Bodexpress.
“Those horses were all affected, we thought, by the interference,” she said. “Therefore, we unanimously determined to disqualify No. 7 and place him behind the 18, the 18 being the lowest-placed horse that he bothered, which is our typical procedure.” That made Maximum Security the 17th-place finisher officially.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/04/sports/kentucky-derby-stewards-video-review.html