"Considering that the schism in 1054 was mostly do to the bishop of Rome trying to institute a policy that the Roman Bishop and Rome itself were more official than other churches it seems ridiculous to me that any churches would attack another on that basis."
You've lost me....Who's attacking whom?
I've seen several orthodox denominations try to say the OCA is illegitimate on the basis of the autocelphany. I've also seen infighting between some OCA and ROCOR folks on this issue.
I think the history of the orthodox church makes fighting about the officialness of one place over another or one patriarch over another silly unless something substantially against the doctrine reveals itself which it hasn't in this case.
The Moscow church has been coming into relations with numerous churches alienated during the 1917 revolution and granting them autocephany.
Now is a time of healing, and I've seen a lot of vicious attacks on healing based on 'questions of authority'.