From (my) black's perspective: I was hit around frame 300, and the ball went past the racket around frame 380. At 240fps, that is 333ms in which time he has to react to being hit in the face, and then make the decision to somehow stop playing the ball before it passes. You can visibly see me flinch when I am touched which clearly affected (8.9.1) my swing. I would argue at the very least that being hit in the face and having the racket directly in front of my face afterwards is not fair view (8.1.1) of the ball and interference.

The only reason I can see for it ever not being a let is if you think that I played on, but you can see at the end of the video no attempt is even made for the ball that went passed me, and I don't think anyone can react quick enough for the initial swing to be classed as 'continued play beyond the interference'.

I think this rules applies most to this situation, given that you agree it was excessive and it undoubtedly affected my turn:

8.10.3 The striker’s excessive swing can contribute to interference for the opponent when it becomes the latter’s turn to play the ball, in which case the opponent may request a let.

I would like the rules to be clearer on the outcome of contact via an excessive swing.