[step:Use a ranked initial position to build a winning strategy for player II]
Assume first that the empty sequence $\varnothing$ belongs to $R$. We define a strategy $\tau$ for player II as follows. At a finite position $s \in \mathbb{N}^{<\mathbb{N}}$ with $|s|$ odd, if $s \in R \cap T$, set
\begin{align*}
\tau(s) := m(s).
\end{align*}
If $s \notin R \cap T$, define $\tau(s)$ arbitrarily, for instance $\tau(s) := 0$.
We prove that $\tau$ is winning for player II. Let $x \in \mathbb{N}^{\mathbb{N}}$ be any play compatible with $\tau$, and for each $k \in \mathbb{N} \cup \{0\}$ define the finite position
\begin{align*}
s_k := (x_0,\dots,x_{k-1}).
\end{align*}
Suppose, toward a contradiction, that $s_k \in T$ for every $k$. Since $s_0 = \varnothing \in R$, induction on $k$ shows that $s_k \in R$ for every $k$. Indeed, if $s_k \in R \cap T$ and $k$ is even, then player I chooses some $x_k \in \mathbb{N}$, and the even-rank clause gives $s_{k+1} = s_k^\frown x_k \in R$. If $s_k \in R \cap T$ and $k$ is odd, then compatibility with $\tau$ gives $x_k = m(s_k)$, so $s_{k+1} = s_k^\frown m(s_k) \in R$.
Moreover, in both cases the ranks strictly decrease:
\begin{align*}
\rho(s_{k+1}) < \rho(s_k).
\end{align*}
Thus the sequence
\begin{align*}
\rho(s_0), \rho(s_1), \rho(s_2), \dots
\end{align*}
is an infinite strictly descending sequence of ordinals, impossible by well-foundedness of the ordinals. Hence some $s_k$ is not in $T$. Then $x \notin [T]$, and since $[T] = A$, we have $x \notin A$. Therefore player II wins every play compatible with $\tau$, so $\tau$ is a winning strategy.
[/step]