Hitting isn't violent? So if I slap you in the face that's not violent? I notice you chose a very limited definition. There are far more. Definition of VIOLENT The rules of Boarding mention the "violence" of the hit. This can very openly be interpreted to simply mean something "extremely powerful or forceful" or even just physically forceful in nature. So again, per the language of the rule ANY hit can be called "illegal" by way of being "violent". Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently or dangerously. The severity of the penalty, based upon the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee. There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a defenseless position and if so, he must avoid or minimize contact. However, in determining whether such contact could have been avoided, the circumstances of the check, including whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position immediately prior to or simultaneously with the check or whether the check was unavoidable can be considered. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule. Which means per your previous statement that "unnecessary" hits are determined by legality COULD include ANY hit. But I'm sure that's not what you meant, even though your reasoning leads directly to that possibility. And again, per the last underlined part of the rule above, note the caveat regarding the opponent putting himself in a vulnerable position (head down in this case) and whether or not the check was unavoidable, which it arguable was not since we can see Wilson's face being smashed by Carlo's fist before Wilson even touches Carlo, obstructing his vision and no doubt causing him to lose some control over his movement.