Despite not being much of a fan of Rufer (from what I've seen), I actually think he deserves quite a decent amount of praise for that performance. I also thought that I would've preferred Singh at the start of the game, but I don't think he would have fared better.
He was given no service by Ridenton, but still managed to turn his marker on at least 3 occasions with very good bits of skill and create good opportunities - with the one that big K got on target the best of them. Also took a wild swing at a shot, but I don't mind that - showed good intent.
I thought it was easily the best performance he has put in for us.
On the flip side, RIdenton was extremely disappointing. He was good tracking back and covering our roving full-backs, but he was so, so poor with his distribution. It was embarrassing at times. Surprsiing, as he has been very solid every time has gotten a chance.
I'm pretty convinced Ridenton was targeted by Adelaide. But as you and someone else has pointed out he also got dragged back a lot to cover others, and I don't believe he got a lot of help from his FBs or Rufer when he had two or three men on him while trying to play forward. It was just an overly compressed mess.
So I'm thinking we've got some work to do in how we manage the midfield as a team, because Paracki is deep, Finkler/Rufer both play high (Sunday and v ACFC) and neither of those CAMs have a particularly high work rate from what I've seen; and I think Ridenton/McG are going to be vulnerable to being isolated in that linking midfield role.
I agree Ridenton had a 'mare. But I'm interested to see, with the experience of this game and some coaching thought, and adjustments, if we handle that sort of pressure better next time, particularly whenever Ridenton's in that role again. You'd hope McG's experience would have him calling some shots a bit more and forcing some switches and for some play to go away from him. Plus he probably has a better turn to get out of trouble.
I wonder if Rufer needed to work back more to provide another option for Paracki - and didn't. And that we needed to do the obvious to switch play away from the congestion more.
If we fix that we'd look a lot more fluent. And we need to.
But I agree Rufer did look good with a number of touches, though I thought I also saw that problem with work rate and fading out of games.
So overall I don't know that we should put the midfield problems entirely at Ridentons feet. If your mate is getting buried, staying high and not showing as a second option is just as big an issue. It's just that Ridenton cops the heat because he is the guy getting mugged. Not to say that it's all Rufer's fault either, but I think we had a number of issues that two relatively young inexperienced players and two new FBs playing their first A League game with this team and with a new DM didn't get to grips with. In some ways, Ridenton did his bit covering others, but he got less help from those around him when he was clearly in trouble.
Just what I think I was seeing (and also at the ACFC game, but less obviously). Interested in others thoughts on that.
Great result though, particularly with four starters out and a limited pre-season. And we avoided that 89th minute killer.
Best opening game result in five seasons.