Brochas Daf Lamed Tes amud aleph

For there were two disciples who were sitting before Bar Kappara. They brought before him cabbage, mountain spinach and partridge. Bar Kappara gave one of the disciples permission to recite the blessing. He hurried to do and recited (shehakol) over the partridge. His colleague mocked (on the basis that he should have given priority to an adoma blessing on the vegetables.)

Bar Kappara became angry. He said, it is not with the one who recited the (shehakol) blessing that I am angry, but rather with the one mocked him ...

He then said, it is not with the one who mocked him that I am angry, but rather with the one who recited the (shehakol) blessing that I am angry.

And he said "if wisdom is not here, is greater age not here?"  It was taught in a Brysa and neither of them lived out the year.

Why does the Gemara not write more concisely, "he was angry with both of them;" and on what basis did the students deserve to die early?

The Ben haYehoyada writes that sometimes one trangresses in a minor fashion and ones sin can be overlooked.  However, if two people sin at the same time, even if the transgressions are minor, they should be upbraided. In this case had the text said "he was angry with both of them;" each student would have thought his own sin was minor and he was only being castigated based on his error occurring at the same time as his fellow student. To avoid this, Bar Kappara reproved each student individually to emphasis the seriousness of each ones action.

The Brysa ends with Bar Kappara's reproof "if wisdom is not here, is greater age not here?" followed by an account of their demise. The point says the Ben haYehoyada is to explain that while each student might potentially have had wisdom, possibly in excess of that of his Rebbe, the latter was still owed the "kovod" (honour) of having his opinion sought on the basis that one show appropriate deference for age.