If a Manager challenges a call that is not eligible for review, the Crew Chief will inform him that the call is not reviewable, and the Club shall not be charged with a challenge"): the game resumed with a 3-2 count, and the foul ball call stood. Replays indicate the ball missed Story's bat and instead hit his shoulder, the call was incorrect (yet not reviewable).
The difference between these two similar plays concerns one—and only one—aspect: the batter's intent. In Miami, Story clearly swung at the pitch, whereas in Houston, Trout had no such intent. (See Replay Review Regulation V.G "Hit By Pitch. Those plays for which there is a possibility that a pitched ball touches a batter, or his clothing.") For this reason, the Miami play was not reviewable and the Houston play was reviewable. Even though in Houston, the end result was a batted ball and groundout, the only reason the play was reviewable to begin with is because of the possibility the play could have been ruled a hit-by-pitch. Conversely, the only reason the play in Miami was not reviewable is because the possibility of a hit-by-pitch did not exist, since no HBP may occur when a batter swings at the pitch.
Alternate Link: Trout inadvertently cue shots a ground ball into fair territory, resulting in an out (HOU)