On the other hand...

Here’s a case where a kvetch is not so much of a kvetch. In Menachot 37a:

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אִטֵּר מַנִּיחַ תְּפִילִּין בִּימִינוֹ, שֶׁהוּא שְׂמֹאלוֹ.
וְהָתַנְיָא: מַנִּיחַ בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ שֶׁהוּא שְׂמֹאלוֹ שֶׁל כׇּל אָדָם!

אֲמַר אַבָּיֵי: כִּי תַּנְיָא הָהִיא בְּשׁוֹלֵט בִּשְׁתֵּי יָדָיו.

The Sages taught in a baraita: A left-handed person dons phylacteries on his right arm, which is equivalent to his left arm, i.e., his weaker arm. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But isn’t it taught in a baraita that a left-handed person dons phylacteries on his left arm, which is the left arm of every other person?

Abaye said: When that baraita is taught, it is referring to one who has equal control with both his hands, i.e., an ambidextrous person. Since such an individual also uses his right hand, he dons phylacteries on his left arm.

The simplest approach is that this is not a problem, per se. Rather, the contradiction stems from a Tannaitic dispute about what an itter, that is, a left-handed person, should do. Even unnamed Tannaim, or authors of anonymous braytot are allowed to argue.

And then, Abaye comes and harmonizes away the contradiction by saying that a lefty is not really a lefty, in a way that makes sense to have him don tefillin on his left hand.

However, Abaye actually taps into what may be a real semantic shift, between Biblical and Mishnaic or Talmudic Hebrew.

At least, that there was a separate Biblical meaning is the claim of this article by Ziony Zevit in Biblica (2020). Thus, the abstract:

The common translation of אטר יד ימינו (Judg 3,15; 20,16) as 'left-handed due to a non-functioning right hand' was known in Tannaitic Hebrew and is supported by modern arguments based on Arabic cognates of Hebrew ’-ṭ-r and the morphology of ’iṭṭēr. An examination of this translation and supporting arguments finds them wanting. This study provides an alternative interpretation based on literary considerations and linguistics. It concludes that the phrase is best translated by 'ambidextrous' and that in Biblical Hebrew it refers to ambidextrous slingers and archers. To reach these conclusions, this study also draws on research into handedness and on educating for ambidexterity.

Some overlapping ideas discussed here. I am not sure I am convinced.

But we would need to look at the Biblical examples. In Shofetim 3, Ehud was אִ֥ישׁ אִטֵּ֖ר יַד־יְמִינ֑וֹ, and that was a major plot point.

וַיִּזְעֲק֣וּ בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל֮ אֶל־יְהֹוָה֒ וַיָּ֩קֶם֩ יְהֹוָ֨ה לָהֶ֜ם מוֹשִׁ֗יעַ אֶת־אֵה֤וּד בֶּן־גֵּרָא֙ בֶּן־הַיְמִינִ֔י אִ֥ישׁ אִטֵּ֖ר יַד־יְמִינ֑וֹ וַיִּשְׁלְח֨וּ בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֤ל בְּיָדוֹ֙ מִנְחָ֔ה לְעֶגְל֖וֹן מֶ֥לֶךְ מוֹאָֽב׃

Then the Israelites cried out to GOD, and GOD raised up a champion for them: the Benjaminite Ehud son of Gera, a left-handed man. It happened that the Israelites sent tribute to King Eglon of Moab through him.

In Shofetim 20:16, there were 700 אִישׁ בָּחוּר אִטֵּר יַד־יְמִינוֹ who were expert slingers who would not miss.

Literally, what is אִטֵּר יַד־יְמִינוֹ? Shriveled? Bound? The Spetuagint translates the term as ἀμφοτεροδέξιον, that is, amphoterodexion, or ambidextrous.

Regardless, it does seem like there is an ambidextrous meaning, so Abaye did not make it up of whole cloth. Thus, different Tannaim could rule differently because they are employing a different meaning of the term. It still seems like something of a kvetch.