Agreed, not very sophisticated but these tanks were thought to be indestructible. I am concerned that their destruction represents some level of understanding of their technology that makes them more vulnerable. "How" it is accomplished is, in my mind, less important than the fact that it was accomplished at all, even if by primitive means. This is not possible without some understanding of their design unless it is a fluke. I would not then expect replication of the results.
There's no such thing as an invulnerable tank. In warfare this century tanks have been among the most vulnerable weapons...particularly in urban areas. The Marines have a saying..."Killing Tanks is Fun and Easy." Tanks have serious visibility and maneuverability problems in built up areas.
It's only the media acting like losing one tank is some sort of shock or crisis.
Traditionally, tank losses in battle are enormous, but fortunately the loss rates among the tank crews are fairly light, typically...at least some, or often all, of the crew escape a destroyed tank.
The Israelis lost plenty of tanks in the 1973 War, for example. They haven't had enough really serious full-scale combat since, to lose plenty of Merkavas, since they were developed after that war.