Originally posted by Raoul Mowatt:
I think even at Competitive REL, I would allow out-of-order sequencing to apply and Player A to have both the chosen creature and the regenerated.
Generally speaking, OOoS applies if Player A were to take all the actions as a “block”, just in the wrong order, and Player A doesn't prematurely gain information that could reasonably affect later decisions in that “block”.
Player B's lack of response is pretty significant here; it lets Player A have information about what to choose and whether to regenerate the creature. That's a lot of information to affect two very big decisions. Plus, these actions don't seem reasonable to conclude as part of a “block”, not when Player A stops and looks at Player B, as if for a response (getting none and then taking other actions). That indicates a very probable pass of priority, with no real “block” of actions.
I feel that applying OOoS here is a stretch of that policy, given the description of events in the OP.