Rafael Nadal and Vera Zvonareva made the headlines for their trophy-winning feats in Indian Wells this week, but there was also a story behind the scenes that gained little coverage.

It involved the Williams sisters, Venus and Serena, who as you may well know have their issues with the California tournament.

They haven't played the event since 2001, the year they had been due to meet in the semi-finals only for Venus to withdraw minutes before the match had been due to start. This happened amid the now-familiar speculation about all-Williams matches. The previous day Elena Dementieva had suggested the winner would be pre-determined. The sisters have always vehemently denied this has ever been the case when they've met.

In the final a couple of days later, Venus and her father Richard were booed as they took their seats, while Serena was subjected to similar treatment throughout the match.

Understandably hurt by this, the pair have boycotted the event ever since.

However, this year the story appeared to take a new twist.

When the WTA's widely trumpeted 'Roadmap' plan was announced towards the end of last season, what was essentially a document shaping the future of the women's game made much of new measures designed to ensure the best players played the best events.

It announced that Indian Wells was now a 'mandatory' tournament for all top-10 players. Anyone missing such an event could be hit with fines and suspensions.

Tennis being the richest female sport, fines were hardly going to do the job; it was therefore the suspension threat that was focused upon.

Could top players afford to skip this big event if they knew they would then miss others and with it the chance of earning a bucketload of ranking points?

Unfortunately what was missing at the time of the Roadmap announcement was the detail.

We now know that and it makes the WTA Tour look something of a paper tiger.

As you may have noticed, Serena and Venus - ranked one and five in the world - duly failed to turn up again in 2009, but they won't be serving any suspension.

When asked the reasons why, a spokeswoman for the WTA Tour told me: "Serena and Venus withdrew from Indian Wells and each have informed the Tour they intend to fulfil the requirements set forth under the Tour rules in order to avoid suspension, including performance of promotional activities in the tournament market at a date to be determined pursuant to the Tour's suspension rule."

Essentially I was pointed in the direction of the WTA rulebook.

The rules regarding suspension, of which little has previously been made, show that players seem highly unlikely ever to be suspended.

Players missing a mandatory tournament can simply avoid a ban by performing promotional activities, either at the event - as Maria Sharapova will do in Miami this coming week - or away from it on dates designated by the WTA.

The Williamses will therefore have to travel to California at some stage for a day of promotional work - a slight inconvenience you suspect, although given they are actually from that state hardly a major problem.

If this is the 'get-out' option on offer, suspensions simply aren't going to happen and the whole 'get-tough' plan looks flimsy to say the least.

Perhaps the rule makers at the WTA decided suspensions weren't really in the tour's best interests which isn't exactly rocket science.

What's the point in antagonising Serena Williams or Maria Sharapova - players who are flag bearers for your product the world over?

And what purpose does it serve by making such a player unavailable to compete in other tournaments - if she's picking up a suspension that means she's already missed one. Why exacerbate the situation?

Just like most sports these days, the power is with the players.

Bids to wrest back some of that power need to be better thought out than the WTA's.

Let us know your thoughts on what the WTA should do to get its top players at its top events. Email your feedback to tennisfeedback@sportinglife.com