Thing is Biziclop, is not that the ball bounced or his foot was high. It was the fact that his studs were raised AND foot high.
But if you ever played football you should know that there's just no other way to hit a ball. When your foot is on the ground, you have an option, when you have to raise it, you must go in studs first, unless you're a trained ballet dancer.
Average park players like me would obviously rather pull out of the tackle but you can't afford it if you're a professional.
I wholeheartedly recommend everyone to watch the highlights of the 1966 match between Hungary and Brazil. not only because they were two of the finest footballing sides of that era, not only because it takes place in a wonderful stadium, and not even for the coppers pacing on the touchline or the sentence "The movement off the ball is magnificient in this match.".
Look at the tackles, they're no better than today, however the tackled player always concentrates on just two things: first, to protect yourself, and second, to get on with it as quickly as possible. But football and defending in particular has lost most of its naivety still present in 1966, and nobody complained about the players getting bigger, stronger, more focused and pushing themselves to the limit more and more with every decade.
And now suddenly people start moaning that it's dangerous and we can't have this and we can't have that. But all we can see is the logical result of the progression football has made: players are more dedicated and believe they're invincible, the stakes are ever higher. We only get what we should expect. If you want to change it, you should change it from the very beginning, not by just adding more and more complicated and unrealistic clauses to the laws of the game.