The question is one of whether the foul altered the finish. Considering the second place horse was on the outside and not offended, the horse offended was not able to keep up with the first horse over the line, Did the alleged foul alter the finish?
@Smokin Joe It wasn't an "alleged" foul, it was a foul seen plain enough in numerous video replays of the race. I saw it myself watching the replay angles. This was the chief steward's statement on the disqualification:
Good evening. The riders of the 18 (Long Range Toddy) and 20 (Country House) horses in the Kentucky Derby lodged objections against the 7 [Maximum Security] horse, the winner, due to interference turning for home leaving the quarter pole. We had a lengthy review of the race. We interviewed affected riders. We determined that the 7 horse drifted out and impacted the progress of number 1, in turn interfering with the 18 and 21 (Bodexpress). Those horses were all affected, we thought, by the interference. Therefore we unanimously determined to disqualify number 7 and place him behind the 18, 18 being the lowest-placed horse that he bothered, which is our typical procedure.
The chief steward also could have mentioned that Maximum Security's move impeded War of Will directly; War of Will was making his own push on the turn in question when the foul occurred, and when War of Will was "offended" it forced Long Range Toddy to pull up and avoid the kind of chain reaction spill that might have taken several horses down and injured them. The fact that Country House wasn't
physically affected by it is irrelevant, since the horse
might well have won the race otherwise, just as War of Will and Long Range Toddy who
were physically affected by the foul were making their own chances to win the race heading to the stretch.
The ruling wasn't a snap decision; it took the stewards 22 minutes to review that turn and that foul. And that's what you
want to do in a race this important: if an objection is lodged, you want to make sure you get it
right.
