Ole clearly sets the team up differently depending on who we are playing, which you imagine is exactly how it should be. Few examples being -;
Burnley 0-1 - Ole opted for aerial prowess by opting for Matic and Pogba at the base of the midfield and Bailly next to Maguire. I believe Ole also saw this as an opportunity to rest Fred and McTominay, who I imagine will play at Anfield.
Chelsea/Liverpool - Ole often sets up in a 5-3-2 formation to combat their attacking wing-backs and to utilise 'split-strikers' to run into the gaps they leave behind. This formation also means we have three CBs, to combat the outside-in runs of the opposition wide forwards AND we have three men in CM to go like-for-like in terms of numbers.
Leeds - Ole clearly opted for athletic players and fast players who would be able to match Leeds' work-rate and drag their opposite number out of position, given Bielsa's tendency to ask his players to man-mark
City - In the past we have gone for the low-block, the two holding midfielders, split-strikers and wing-backs. At OT in the League Cup, we were confident enough to line-up in a more positive, attacking shape and broadly matched City, who played well themselves, apart from the obvious issues we had at set-pieces!
Arsenal 0-1 - This is the one I feel Ole really got wrong this season. We went with that daft diamond, which I really don't like as a formation, and entrusted Greenwood and Rashford to operate as split strikers. This didn't work for two reasons, one, the lack of width invited a strong, high press which plays into Arsenal's hands. Furthermore, Greenwood and Rashford where not good enough at holding the ball up, so we struggled to get out first half. Second half, we went 4-5-1 and began to control the game, only for Pogba to give away a nothing penalty.
So I am sure there are far more examples than that, but these are just some of the obvious examples that spring to mind. For me, it shows flexibility and the fact that we generally switch between formations fairly easily even mid-game shows that we are far from 'poorly coached' as some have argued.