Dick says that Cleveland has lost its challenge but it depends on what they were challenging. If they were challenging the fair/foul call they lose it but if they were challenging that it should have been called a double then they don't lose it. I don't think Dicknroy ever confirmed which call was being challenged. And on a related matter I have said before that I think the challenge rule should be modified. Overturning the call on the field should not require clear evidence to the contrary. Instead, I think the reviewers should NOT know the call on the field. The reviewers should rule safe, out, or inconclusive. (Or, as in this case, fair, foul, or inconclusive.) The call on the field stands only if the reviewers rule inconclusive.