Character Analysis
It sucks to be Lords Stafford and Saye. When the rebellion breaks out, they pretty much find themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time: Lord Stafford and his brother get bumped off and dragged around the streets by horses, while Lord Saye and his son-in-law are beheaded—and their severed heads are planted on stakes and made to kiss as they're paraded through the streets.
How did this happen to them? Well, Stafford and his brother deliberately stand in the way of rebels at one point. Stafford is staunchly for the king, and he says right to Cade's face that he and his buddies are "rebellious hinds, the filth and scum of Kent" (4.2.119). When the rebels kill Stafford and his brother, it's not totally clear if they're doing it because they have a concrete political issue with them or if it's more about a personal vendetta.
Saye, for his part, is pretty confused about the whole thing when Cade and company confront him. He asks the rebels, "Tell me, wherein have I offended most?" (4.7.97). Well, that's a good question. The rebels seem to hold Saye responsible for the fact that education and literacy are only given to the upper classes, which gives them even more power over the lower classes.
The truth is that Saye hasn't really done more than any of the other nobles to oppress the lower classes; the rebels just target him, plain and simple. When Saye protests his innocence, it doesn't matter, because the rebels are about as interested in true justice as the nobles are. Cade may have some ideas about who's to blame and what he wants to change, but most of the rebels seem happy to just take out their frustration on whomever happens to be nearby at the time.
So although we can probably all agree that the nobles in this play are some nasty pieces of work, we shouldn't just take the rebels' side without thinking about it first. Both sides do some pretty nasty things, and neither side has a totally logical or just agenda.