You were criticizing not offering the chalice, right?
That suggested that you thought both species should be offered.
So then the question is how and to what extent is partaking of both kinds necessary. For example, would it be necessary for whom gluten provokes a nasty reaction to partake of the Sacred Body, even though the 'accidents' remain? What EXACTLY would someone who could not safely eat the "accidents" of bread be missing if he only received the Precious Blood.
Good theology involves more than merely mocking those with whom one disagrees. If one triumphantly makes an observation or contemptuously asks a question, there will be interpretations of the observation and answers to the questions.
If the person trumpeting observations and questions does not read the answers or, at any rate respond to them, there's a suggestion of darkening counsel with words without knowledge.